Originally published for customers December 29, 2023
Greenfield interstate natural gas pipeline development has mostly stalled due to legal and regulatory hurdles, and even for looping and compression projects, regulatory uncertainty persists. We took a look at trends in environmental reviews to help determine where the current commission stands.
What’s the issue?
Greenfield interstate natural gas pipeline development has mostly stalled due to legal and regulatory hurdles. As we explored in Serving the Coming LNG Demand, this scenario means existing pipelines — that can expand through looping and compression with low litigation risk — are advantaged in the market. However, regulatory uncertainty persists even for these projects, notably surrounding the need for an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to assess environmental impacts.
Why does it matter?
For project developers, trying to determine whether a project will be deemed to need an EA or an EIS can feel a bit like shaking up a Magic 8 Ball, and the resulting answer can have real consequences for project costs.
What’s our view?
To add some clarity to this question, we analyzed historical trends in environmental analysis for compression, looping, and lateral projects to determine which have needed EISs, which have needed EAs, and where the current Commission stands on the issue.
To access the full article, get in touch.
