$1.3 trillion windfall coming up on America’s GDP horizon with LNG bonanza

January 24, 2025, by Melisa Cavcic

Having in mind the recent changes in U.S. energy policy, set in motion by a slew of executive orders, the state of play in the gas market, especially in the liquefied natural gas (LNG) arena, has seen a tectonic shift, as U.S. President Donald Trump presses the play button to jump-start stalled projects after an LNG pause left a temporary lull in its wake. With 14 multibillion-dollar projects likely to be lined up on the LNG export menu, America seems poised to reach the $1.3 trillion gross domestic product (GDP) promise spotlighted in a recent S&P Global study, making a strong case for an LNG boom. Will these projects usher in a more sustainable era in the U.S., bringing it closer to its decarbonization goals, or spur climate litigation?

Key highlights:

Oil takes a backseat as gas takes North American wheel
LNG boom taking shape on the U.S. energy horizon
U.S. LNG exports bringing 500K jobs
U.S. dilemma: To go on LNG export spree or not?
Trump puts the wind in 14 LNG projects’ sails
All-of-the-above strategy key to ‘energy abundance’

Trump’s return to the White House is widely associated with expectations of a pivot toward deregulation, a faster energy permitting process, more oil and gas exploration and production, and an end to the Biden administration’s LNG export permitting pause for non-free trade agreement (non-FTA) countries. The pause was not planned to be lifted until all environmental reviews were out of the way.

President Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, implemented a national energy emergency, temporary freeze on offshore wind leasing, reversal of the U.S. LNG export permitting pause, Biden’s ban on offshore drilling, and other moves he plans to implement to bolster Big Oil’s role in the energy sector while narrowing down and even cutting off support for some clean energy alternatives considered crucial to power the transformation to net zero.

View on Offshore-energy.

To this end, he instructed federal agencies to undo Biden’s climate, energy, and pollution reduction policies. In response, Earthjustice underlined that Trump had declared a “fossil energy emergency.” Climate activists claim that the newly sworn-in U.S. President’s moves undermined key environmental protections and undercut clean energy investments.

Earthjustice vows to fight the Trump administration’s plans in court every step of the way as it did before, winning reportedly 85% of the cases. This nonprofit public-interest environmental law organization claims that Trump wasted no time in rolling back policies that protect air, water, and progress toward net zero. In light of this, the NGO accuses the Republican leader of abandoning U.S. climate leadership at home and abroad in his first hours back in the office.

As Trump has removed safeguards on drilling, logging, and mining in Alaska, pushing to expand fossil fuel production across America by revoking the sweeping protections from oil and gas the Biden administration issued on 625 million acres of public waters, Earthjustice has assured that President’s backtracking on climate leadership will not stop it from fighting for the clean energy future it believes the U.S. needs.

View on Offshore-energy.

“We will frack, frack, frack; and drill, baby, drill. I will cut your energy prices […] in half within 12 months of taking office. That’s going to bring everything down,” Trump pledged at an October 2024 campaign event.

Oil takes a backseat as gas overtakes North American wheel

According to Enverus Intelligence Research (EIR) experts, the intersection of power and gas will drive the North American energy narrative in 2025, pushing oil production to the backseat, as the race for artificial intelligence dominance, which has escalated into a global security issue, keeps raising the stakes for all market participants while they balance volatile commodity prices, potential trade wars, uncertain demand, environmental pressure, and investors’ demands for capital discipline.

With gas poised to be in the leading role, Markus Wenker, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Yinson Production, seems to share Enverus’ view regarding the subordinate role oil will be designated to endure, as he outlines two reasons why a significant increase in U.S. oil production is “rather unlikely.” The economics of U.S. oil take the first place on his list.

“US oil has relatively high B/E-rates resulting in low contribution margins of any additional well drilled in the current oil price environment. Against this backdrop, I think it would be unlikely (as irrational) for US oil companies to change their capital allocation priorities at the cost of profitability. In fact, a recent Dallas Fed survey revealed that more US producers expect a decrease, not an increase in capex in 2025,” Yinson Production’s CFO stated.

While putting down market dynamics as the second reason, Wenker elaborated: “Even if US oil production were to increase, it remains to be seen how the other market constituents — particularly Saudi Arabia — would react, given that such a development would be against their interests. However, I believe the new policy will have another impact: it will positively influence how banks and the capital markets look at oil — also benefiting the FPSO industry.”

View on Twitter.

Over the past few weeks, Wall Street made some changes to its policy in line with President Trump’s energy plans, taking a U-turn on climate action with six major U.S. banks, led by Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and JP Morgan Chase bringing up the rear as the last one to decide to back out of the UN’s Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) by 2050 to ensure a profit from the Trump administration’s fossil energy expansion plans without hindrance.

After these North American banks opted to exit the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, Yinson Production’s CFO shared his observation about investors’ rising appetite for oil. He underlines that oil often finds itself on the ‘naughty list’ of financiers unfairly, even though the world still needs it in reality, as it plays “a critical role in energy transition.”

View on Twitter.

Wenker continued: “A forced energy transition does not work unless governments massively increase subsidies. In the absence of an attractive risk-reward for investments in renewables, reducing investments in oil does not automatically translate into increasing investments in renewables. To the contrary: a lack of investments in oil and gas risks energy security and increasing energy prices — which some may incorrectly blame renewables for, ultimately slowing down the energy transition.

“In my opinion, the better approach is to continue financing companies which actively contribute to the energy transition through innovation and using profits from oil and gas towards financing the energy transition. This would help achieve an attractive risk-reward balance and ensure an affordable and sustainable energy transition. Yinson is a good example for this approach: by investing profits of the group’s FPSO business, Yinson Production, into Yinson Renewables and Yinson GreenTech, we actively contribute to an affordable and sustainable energy transition.”

LNG boom taking shape on the U.S. energy horizon

Enverus’ ‘2025 Global Energy Outlook’ pinpoints among key issues and themes to watch in 2025 U.S. data center boom, LNG growth, and regulatory changes made to reshape energy markets. While data centers are expected to drive U.S. load growth and rising LNG exports are projected to lift Henry Hub prices to $4/MMBtu, spurring increased gas rig activity, this research shows that LNG supply growth will test global market absorption. President Trump’s policies may also threaten tax credits for hydrogen and geothermal technologies.

Against this backdrop, momentum will continue to build for transition technologies, such as battery storage, which Enverus believes will continue to reshape U.S. power markets, as renewable natural gas, sustainable aviation fuels, and U.S. carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) projects gain traction. This research notes that energy security and climate goals will drive new investments in the Asia-Pacific region.

View on Offshore-energy.

The energy-dedicated SaaS company forecasts cautious resource expansion amid oil price volatility, with Brent predicted to average $80/bbl, putting the limelight on OPEC+ and China. Even though global exploration is anticipated to remain dominated by supermajors and national oil companies (NOCs), with U.S. resource expansion focused on the northern Delaware Basin, smaller, less economic acquisitions are still expected in the U.S. along with Argentina’s shale growth, which is likely to start turning heads.

Moreover, Enverus claims that the upstream industry will focus on efficiency, with U.S. well costs stabilizing as efficiency gains counter tariff pressures, with four-mile laterals expanding, Permian productivity continuing to hold steady, and Haynesville showing improvement.

U.S. LNG exports bringing 500K jobs

Despite the legal threats that loom over the LNG and overall fossil fuel expansion on climate grounds, such projects are widely understood to be beneficial for the U.S. economy based on multiple studies, including ‘Major New U.S. Industry at a Crossroads: A U.S. LNG Impact Study,’ done by S&P Global and supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

This study finds that growing exports of U.S. liquefied natural gas would support nearly half a million domestic jobs annually and contribute $1.3 trillion to U.S. gross domestic product through 2040 while having a negligible impact on domestic gas prices. S&P Global’s research shows that U.S. LNG export capacity will double over the next five years.

Aside from the projected sizeable jobs and GDP gains, the study shows that future export activity is likely to generate more than $2.5 trillion in total revenues for America’s businesses, $166 billion in federal and state tax revenues, and more than $500 billion in labor income.

Daniel Yergin, Vice Chairman at S&P Global, commented: “The emergence of the U.S. LNG industry has placed the United States in the pole position with global demand for gas expected to grow through 2040 alongside the rapid growth of renewables. Continued growth in U.S. LNG capacity would have outsized impact in terms of jobs, GDP and labor income.

“In addition to domestic economic benefits, being the world’s leading LNG supplier adds a new dimension to U.S. influence abroad. It was U.S. LNG that replaced nearly half of Russia gas supply to Europe after the outbreak of war in Ukraine.”

After LNG emerged as a major U.S. industry in less than a decade and made the United States the world’s leading supplier, exports of LNG have already bolstered the job market, supporting more than 270,000 U.S. jobs annually, and generated more than $400 billion in GDP and more than $800 billion in total revenues for domestic businesses since exports began in 2016.

As a result, LNG export revenues are said to exceed those of U.S. soybeans, are perceived to be twice that of the nation’s movie and television exports, and are half those of U.S. semiconductors. Simultaneously, the majority of gas supply, or nearly 90%, remains available for domestic consumption, with natural gas prices for households continuing to be among the lowest in the world. These are some reasons why many energy analysts and politicians back LNG expansion.

Eric Eyberg, Vice President of Gas and Power Consulting at S&P Global Commodity Insights, emphasized: “U.S. gas production has more than tripled compared to the amount of LNG that the country exports. That abundant supply has allowed LNG exports to support more than 270,000 jobs annually and contribute more than $400 Billion to GDP to date with no major impact to domestic prices.”

S&P Global’s study predicts substantial repercussions if new or previously halted LNG capacity does not come online, as under its extended halt scenario with 40% of U.S. LNG growth in peril, an annual average of over 100,000 jobs would be at risk, more than $250 billion GDP contributions would go unrealized, $491 billion in revenues would be lost for U.S. businesses, leading to $110 billion in lost labor income and $34 billion forgone federal and state tax revenues. In total, 85% of the supply deficit under the extended halt scenario would be made up of fossil fuels from non-U.S. sources.

The study’s findings indicate that restricting future LNG capacity would have little to no benefit in terms of U.S. natural gas prices either, as the difference between the two scenarios in terms of average annual gas costs for U.S. households from 2025 to 2040 would be less than 1%.

However, if future U.S. capacity were not to materialize, other countries would seek to fill the gap, with Qatar, Canada, and Mozambique expected to accelerate their projects to claim market share while other countries, including Russia, would likely add capacity too.

Carlos Pascual, Senior Vice President for Global Energy and International Affairs at S&P Global Commodity Insights, pointed out: “The economic consequences to ceding the U.S. position in LNG would be stark, but it goes far beyond that.

“Such a move would diminish U.S. geopolitical influence as a reliable and affordable energy supplier to allies and trading partners, as a key source for expanding energy access in developing countries and—by providing a replacement for coal in baseload power generation—an important catalyst to global decarbonization efforts.”

U.S. dilemma: To go on LNG export spree or not?

A recent study, conducted by Raena Garcia and Lukas Ross of Friends of the Earth in collaboration with Alan Zibel and Dan Wagner of Public Citizen, underlined: “Despite claims that LNG exports are needed to support European allies, Asia Pacific customers account for a bigger share, about 29%, of LNG volume to be sold from the 14 terminals. These buyers include numerous Chinese and South Korean companies. About 19% of the volume is destined for Europe, where LNG imports surged after the war in Ukraine but have since declined.”

The two climate-conscious groups claim that the largest single buyer of LNG from the 14 terminals is Saudi Aramco, accounting for 8% of the total volume, followed by Shell at 7%, and Chevron at 5%, while the supply agreements executed so far represent over 510 million metric tons of climate pollution–equivalent to the annual emissions of 135 new coal plants. Their research predicts that Trump’s return to power will allow fossil fuel executives to drill for more oil and gas and build pipelines, but will not unlock benefits for U.S. consumers, as they will likely face higher prices.

View on Twitter.

Jennifer Granholm, former Energy Secretary, stated: “We have recently lived through the real-world ripple effects of increased energy prices domestically and globally since the pandemic. Middle and low-income households already face energy bills that are too high. In parts of the South, the export-induced price increase would put some households over the energy burden threshold, further challenging their ability to meet basic needs.”

Climate campaigners justify their negative views on LNG by referring to the findings from a 2024 study in which the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) seemingly found various reasons why the expansion of LNG exports would bring more harm than good to the public. While Trump has declared a national energy emergency, Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen claim it is unclear what effect these orders will have, but add that LNG export approvals may be vulnerable to legal challenges.

Marty Durbin, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Senior Vice President of Policy, said in December 2024: “LNG exports are not only in America’s national interest, but also in the world’s interest, including our European allies seeking to break free from dependence on Russian gas. From the beginning, the White House moratorium on new LNG export facilities was a politically-driven exercise with harmful impacts on the U.S. economy and the energy security of America’s allies.”

All odds appear stacked in the LNG growth favor, with energy market analysts predicting boom times for global LNG. Taking note of this, Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen are adamant that LNG exporters are building terminals in North America despite many warnings of a forthcoming global LNG supply glut because their mega construction projects are insulated from the risk of a collapse in LNG prices, thanks to guaranteed revenue from 20-year contracts.

View on Twitter.

Pennsylvania consumer advocates wrote in a November 2024 letter to the U.S. Department of Energy about the impact on low-income consumers: “Increased gas exports overseas can have a direct and substantial negative impact on energy affordability for retail consumers at home — especially low and moderate-income families, affordable housing providers, and small businesses who already struggle to keep up with the rapidly rising cost of energy.”

According to Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen, American businesses also face harm from LNG exports, as the DOE study found that they could push costs for the industrial sector up by $125 billion through 2050, which would be spread through the economy via higher prices.

The duo made it clear that the Energy Department study also countered “a bogus oil and gas industry claim” that LNG exports benefit the climate by providing gas as an alternative to polluting coal-fired electricity production, especially in Asia, since exported methane would end up displacing more renewable energy from the global power supply than coal.

View on Twitter.

Big Oil supporters sought to undermine the report, with the National Association of Manufacturers characterizing the study as “a politically motivated document designed for an audience who believes no form of carbon-based energy is acceptable,” urging Trump to “end this political war on the energy manufacturers that power our economy, fuel job growth and help ensure America’s national security.”

Trump puts the wind in 14 LNG projects’ sails

Taking into account Trump’s meeting with several executives, such as those engaged in the LNG export industry from Venture Global, EQT, and Cheniere Energy, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in April 2024, many note that the LNG export industry has ties with the new Trump administration.

Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen have spotlighted 14 proposed U.S. LNG export terminals, which are making deals left and right to sell their output, as the ones that could win “rapid approval” from the Trump administration, delivering a windfall for U.S. companies and exporters. These climate activist groups believe the LNG projects would push up prices for American consumers and cause harm to the climate and vulnerable communities.

View on Twitter.

Most of the top 14 LNG projects with established commercial momentum are either located in Louisiana or Texas, with only a handful in Mexico. These projects still require some action from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the Department of Energy, or both federal agencies, but are likely to be among the main beneficiaries of the shift in U.S. energy policy on LNG exports. Seven of these 14 projects are situated in Louisiana, four in Texas, two in Mexico, and one in the Gulf of Mexico, which Trump plans to rename as the Gulf of America.

These projects are Venture Global’s CP2 in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana; Woodside Energy’s Woodside Louisiana LNG also in Calcasieu Parish; Energy Transfer’s Lake Charles LNG terminal in Louisiana; Mexico Pacific’s Saguaro Energia terminal in Sonora, Mexico, which is planned to be developed in two stages, Mexico Pacific 1-2 and Mexico Pacific 3; Sempra Energy’s Port Arthur terminal expansion in Texas; Delfin Midstream offshore terminal in the Gulf of Mexico; Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass terminal expansion in Louisiana; Commonwealth Energy in Cameron Parish, Louisiana; Glenfarne Group/Alder Midstream-backed Magnolia LNG Lake Charles, Louisiana; LNG Alliance’s Amigo terminal in Sonora, Mexico; Sempra Energy’s Cameron Phase Two in Hackberry, Louisiana; NextDecade’s Rio Grande Phase Two in Brownsville, Texas; Glenfarne Group’s Texas LNG Brownsville in Texas; and Cheniere Energy’s Corpus Christi terminal expansion also in Texas.

14 pending LNG export projects with signed supply agreements; Source: Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen

The duo’s analysis has found that these 14 LNG export projects have signed at least one deal with a disclosed buyer, leading to 76 million metric tons per year of LNG currently under agreement to be sold from these facilities in the U.S. and Mexico, with over 51% of this going to Big Oil companies and commodity trading firms that sell gas worldwide to fetch the highest price, including to China, where gas imports seem to be booming.

While Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass terminal in Louisiana set the U.S. LNG export boom in motion in 2016, with seven more U.S. export terminals following suit, more multibillion-dollar projects are under construction in the U.S. and Mexico, or currently in various stages of the planning and approval process, mostly backed by multiple investors such as private equity firms and foreign investment funds to spread out risk.

While there is no doubt that Trump’s return to the White House will speed up the approval of many new export terminals and extensions of existing permits, the 14 pending export terminals, Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen identified after going over multiple pending LNG terminals in various stages of regulatory approval, have the greatest commercial viability because of either binding sales and purchase (SPA) contracts or an initial non-binding agreement known as heads of agreement (HOA) with long-term LNG purchasers.

View on Twitter.

However, more projects could end up being built if the Trump administration decides to pursue the issue with more vigor by approving as many export terminals as possible, leaving it to investors to gauge which projects are worth massive investments, and rising construction costs and cost overruns that would likely follow closely behind. On top of existing export levels of 86.9 million metric tons in 2024, the analysis from Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen found that 95 million metric tons of LNG per year are slated to be exported from 14 terminals in the U.S. and Mexico.

Granholm emphasized in December 2024: “Any sound and durable approach for considering additional authorizations should consider where those LNG exports are headed, and whether targeted guardrails may be utilized to protect the public interest. European demand for natural gas has flattened and is set to decline substantially in line with Europe’s efforts to reduce its climate footprint.”

View on Twitter.

While over 51% of this contracted LNG volume is expected to go to Big Oil companies – such as Aramco, Shell, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips – and commodity trading firms Gunvor and Woodside Trading, purchase agreements with Asia Pacific customers account for about 29%, and Europe is estimated to have reserved around 19% of the volume for its use as these LNG customers have been reluctant to sign long-term LNG supply deals since the continent is working to curtail methane gas consumption and ramp up clean energy.

Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen underlined: “Trump threatened the European Union, calling on European leaders to buy U.S. oil and gas or face tariffs in retaliation. However, the crisis sparked by the curtailment of Russian gas, which boosted U.S. gas exports to Europe, is waning.

“Europe has likely passed its peak in LNG usage, with European gas demand declining as the continent cuts gas consumption by implementing energy efficiency measures and adopting renewable energy. European officials plan to cut gas consumption in half by 2030, meaning that European demand will no longer drive export growth for U.S. producers.”

View on Twitter.

Since overseas investors are the main source of funding for U.S. LNG projects, the duo concludes that much of the profit from the LNG terminal build-out will flow overseas, as the list of key large investors includes foreign players based in Australia, Qatar, Japan, Canada, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Saudi Arabia, such as Australia’s Woodside Energy, which entered the U.S. market in fall 2024 by purchasing the LNG terminal developer Tellurian and its Driftwood LNG project for $1.2 billion, and QatarEnergy that has a 70% stake in the Golden Pass LNG terminal in Texas alongside ExxonMobil.

In addition, Japanese companies have investments in Delfin LNG, Freeport LNG, and Cameron LNG, while the UAE-based Abu Dhabi Investment Authority has completed deals with Sempra and Cheniere Energy. South Korea’s Hanwha Group acquired gradually about 23% of NextDecade. Saudi Aramco reached a preliminary 20-year deal to buy 5 million tons per year of LNG from the second phase of Sempra Energy’s Port Arthur LNG project as well as a 25% equity stake in the project and a preliminary 20-year deal to purchase 1.2 million tonnes per year of LNG from Next Decade Inc’s Rio Grande export terminal.

Top buyers of LNG supplies from 14 projects; Source: Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen

Aside from the 14 giant LNG projects that have publicly disclosed buyers of LNG, Friends of the Earth and Public Citizen list several more projects that may pick up speed in the coming years, including Eagle LNG, a small proposed export terminal near Jacksonville, Florida, which is owned by Houston-based Energy & Minerals Group. This project caught the duo’s attention as Susie Wiles, Trump’s Chief of Staff, worked as a lobbyist for the project in 2018 and 2019.

The project’s developers informed FERC in August 2024 about the delay in its development arising from construction cost increases, which enabled it to secure an extension of its approval until 2029. Eagle LNG’s focus is on Caribbean island consumers, where its LNG is expected to be used for electricity generation and as fuel for cruise ships, but the project’s full list of customers remains confidential.

View on Twitter.

Among the projects that are bound to benefit from Trump’s determination to develop the ‘liquid gold’ underneath America’s soil and ocean is the Alaska LNG project with a price tag surpassing $40 billion. The project aims to move natural gas from the North Slope through an 800-mile pipeline to be liquefied at a facility in Nikiski and shipped overseas.

LNG given prime spot in Trump’s new directive to unleash Alaska’s resource potential

Authorities & Government

In the Alaska-specific order, the Trump administration called for prioritizing the development of Alaska’s LNG, including the sale and transportation to other regions of the United States and allied nations within the Pacific region, as well as the permitting of all necessary pipeline and export infrastructure related to the project. However, environmental groups see President Trump’s order concerning this LNG project and others alike as “destructive.”

Carole Holley, Earthjustice’s Managing Attorney for the Alaska Office, said: “The Trump administration’s agenda for Alaska would destroy valuable habitats and subsistence hunting and fishing grounds while furthering the climate crisis. Earthjustice and its clients will not stand idly by while Trump once again forces a harmful industry-driven agenda on our state for political gain and the benefit of a wealthy few.”

View on Twitter.

Research, conducted for the USLNG Association (LNG Allies) and the American Exploration and Production Council by Berkeley Research Group’s Energy and Climate Practice, found that the U.S. LNG has less than half the carbon footprint of coal in 13 global markets.

While the greenhouse gas emissions intensity was less than 50% of coal in Europe and Asia in 2022 and lower than pipeline gas imported from Algeria, Russia, and Turkmenistan, it was still 4% higher than pipeline gas from Azerbaijan and 38% higher than gas from Norway.

All-of-the-above strategy key to ‘energy abundance’

Many advantages come with the diversification of supplies, which unleashes ‘energy abundance,’ as hammered home by Chris Wright, Trump’s pick for the role of U.S. Energy Secretary, who is set on “growing the supply of affordable, reliable, secure American energy.”

View on Offshore-energy.

This approach encapsulates oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and hydropower as the most dominant sources of energy supply, enriched by wind and solar as two fastest growing additions, and followed by geothermal, seen as a promising play to widen America’s energy horizons’ arsenal.

Wright confirmed his interest in reaping the benefits of implementing an all-of-the-above energy policy when he vowed to be “an unabashed steward for all sources of affordable, reliable and secure American energy,” which he intends to promote by “improving all energy technologies that can better human lives and reduce emissions. They go together.”

In his view, there is no “dirty energy and clean energy,” as all available sources have “different trade-offs,” so he emphasizes that it all comes down to “climates more favorable to this energy versus that energy.”

View on Twitter.

This way of looking at the all-of-the-above energy strategy favors the build-out of LNG infrastructure, as illustrated by Durbin, when he pointed out that the research conducted by S&P Global’s team stood in stark contrast to the DOE report, projecting $1.3 trillion to be injected into the U.S. economy through 2040, leading to nearly 500,000 new jobs and $166 billion in tax revenues.

He highlighted: “The results further illustrate the economic, environmental, and geopolitical harm of blocking new LNG exports, which, if continued, would see LNG replaced overwhelmingly by fossil fuel resources from other countries.”

S&P Global’s findings place the U.S. natural gas resources at around 1,300 trillion cubic feet (tcf) with break-evens below $4 per million btu, which is perceived to be equivalent to 35 years of demand at current levels.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Offshore Energy.

ADVERTISE ON OFFSHORE ENERGY

𝐃𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐛 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞? 𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐧𝐨 𝐟𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲! 𝐎𝐮𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐢𝐥 & 𝐠𝐚𝐬, 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞, 𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐝, 𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐞, 𝐡𝐲𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐞𝐧, 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐞𝐚, 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲, 𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐞𝐥𝐬, 𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐚 𝐝𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐬.

ADVERTISING OPTIONS

Follow Offshore Energy’s Fossil Energy market on social media channels:

Facebook

Twitter

Google News

Google News – Offshore Energy