Bookmark and Share



» Clean Energy

» Affordable Energy

» Clean, Affordable Transportation

» Dirty Coal

» Nuclear Relapse

Call to Action

Tell Congress to Reject Efforts to Undermine the Clean Air Act.

Additional Resources

Interactive Map of Proposed New Reactors
Energy Blog
Join our Facebook page

Public Citizen | Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) - Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)

LNG Factsheets

- Campaign Contributions and Amount Spent Lobbying the Federal Government By Major Developers of Proposed LNG Projects

- Proposed and Recently Approved Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities (by location)

- Proposed and Recently Approved Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities (by company)

LNG is natural gas supercooled into a liquid form. This is done to more easily transport natural gas to the U.S. from destinations not linked by pipeline (for example, importing natural gas from Canada can be accomplished by sending natural gas through a pipeline; importing natural gas from Indonesia or Nigeria must be done by transporting LNG by tanker). LNG can pose significant security and environmental hazards.

In response to concerns of looming domestic natural gas shortages, disputes have arisen between states, community groups and the federal government over whether Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) represents a solution or a new problem for America's energy policy. In a distressing move on November 19, 2004, some in Congress sought to pre-empt this debate by sneaking controversial language into a conference report, without a vote, that may undermine the ability of states and local communities to have their voices adequately represented in this important debate.

In June the National Governor's Association wrote the U.S. Senate urging them to support the bi-partisan amendment to the energy bill protecting the ability of states to have adequate say over the siting and permitting of proposed LNG facilities.

The Senate ultimately rejected NGA's (and Public Citizen's) request.  On June 22, 2005 the US Senate voted 52 to 45 (3 not voting) rejecting an amendment to the energy bill that would have provided Governors the right to veto proposed LNG projects (a "nay" vote is the good vote).

Previously the House, voting 237 to 194, struck down an amendment to remove language which gives the federal government exclusive jurisdiction over LNG permitting and siting. So a "no" vote forbade states from having an adequate say over the siting and permitting of LNG facilities

Press Release: Groups Say LNG Facility Must Be Strongly Regulated

Former White House counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke report on security threats associated with LNG marine facilities

Republican Members of House Energy Committee Draft Energy Legislation Undermining State & Local Control Over LNG

Congress Sneaks in Language Undermining State and Local Control Over Hazardous, Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities

Action Alert! Stop Congress From Undermining Local Control Over LNG

Letter from Rhode Island Attorney General Lynch Responding to Proposed Language in Congressional Bill (H.R. 4818) Affecting LNG Facilities

California Public Utilities Commission February 2004 Protest to the LNG power grab by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Existing & Proposed North American LNG Terminals

U.S. Senate Testimony of Wenonah Hauter on Natural Gas and LNG Concerns

Appendix to Wenonah Hauter Testimony

Prior Attempt by Congress to Install Anti-Consumer LNG Provision into Energy Legislation

Copyright © 2017 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.

Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation


Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.


To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.