Case study of the Rio Grande Valley projects and key considerations for financial institutions
The IPCC recommendations and the International EnergyAgency call for an end to oil and gas expansion. However,multiple gas production and transportation projects could be developed in the next few years. This is particularly the case for shale gas production projects and liquefied natural gas terminals currently being developed across the Atlantic. While the energy crisis, particularly linked to the war in Ukraine, is once again underlining the urgent need to move away from fossil fuels, many projects are being relaunched and accelerated.
These projects not only threaten to lock in greenhouse gas emissions that are incompatible with the remaining carbon budget in a scenario aimed at limiting warming to 1.5°C, but are also intrinsically linked to violations of the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, as well as to intimidation and significant risks in terms of pollution and destruction of natural resources.
In particular, two LNG terminal projects in the Rio Grande Valley in South Texas threaten to extensively and negatively affectIndigenous rights, community health, endangered species, and the climate: Texas LNG (owned by Glenfarne Group, SamsungEngineering Co, and Texas LNG) and Rio Grande LNG (owned byNextDecade). If Texas LNG has not secured any exporting contracts to date, several contracts have been signed concerningRio Grande LNG - notably with Engie, Shell, and ExxonMobil.
In this webinar, we discussed the increasing place of US LNG in global LNG trade, the state of play of LNG terminal projects in the US, and how the Russian war in Ukraine impacted them. We addressed the impact of US LNG exports on natural gas prices as well as on consumers, both globally and in the US. Then, we dived into the Texas LNG and Rio Grande LNG projects with two people mobilized on the ground in South Texas to bear witness to their struggle and alert on the risks and impacts of the oil and gas industry in their country.