Democrats continue to play politics with America’s energy future.
A flashy investigation by congressional Democrats into charges Donald Trump had entered into a “quid pro quo” arrangement with oil company executives produced no fruit. Nonetheless, the party of Pelosi and company continue to allege that energy industry leaders are “conspiring” with the former president.
It’s just one more attempt by Democrats to distract the public and blur the lines so no one suspects the actual energy quid pro quo relationship may be dark money dollars to Democratic campaigns in exchange for the White House putting the brakes on liquefied natural gas exports.
The environmental benefits of natural gas are clear. A July 2024 NACEF-ICF study showed liquefied natural gas exports “have lower lifecycle” greenhouse gas emission “compared to using coal alone, fuel oil alone, or the expected mix of alternative fuels” that would most likely replace them. The study said without liquefied natural gas exported abroad, that energy would be replaced with 54% coal, 34% fuel oil, 16% domestic natural gas, and just 7.8% renewable sources.
In July 2024, The Breakthrough Institute detailed the errors and flaws of a major 2023 academic paper supposedly exposing liquefied natural gas for having higher greenhouse gas emissions than coal. Such examples show that liquefied natural gas is indeed a cleaner fuel alternative to coal and can aid in ongoing energy transition goals.
Did the Biden-Harris Administration enact the 2024 liquefied natural gas export as part of a quid pro quo? It’s a question that should be asked. A network that includes dark money sources, the Rockefeller Family, and New York billionaire Michael Bloomberg funds interest groups promoting the pause policy. Three key points suggest something’s afoot:
• The Wall Street Journal detailed how the Funder Collaborative on Oil and Gas, a project of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Rockefeller Family Fund, has been instrumental in lobbying for the liquefied natural gas pause. This is based primarily on ties to Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg Philanthropies, environmental activist Roishetta Ozane, and a reported 2019 memo circulated throughout the Funder Collaborative to take on liquefied natural gas.
• OpenSecrets has reported that individuals from the Rockefeller Family Fund have made numerous contributions in the 2020 election cycle, almost exclusively to Democrats who have expressed support for the liquefied natural gas pause. This has included $25,677 directly to Joe Biden in 2020.
• Tablet Magazine has reported on Arabella Advisors, a left-wing strategic consulting firm that has received $43 million over the years from the Rockefeller Foundation. Arabella Advisors is notable for being a left-wing “dark money” organization that funds pop-up grassroots campaigns like those mentioned in the Wall Street Journal.
It certainly looks like the liquefied natural gas export pause is a creation of partisan political concerns rather than a pragmatic policy move. It should be rescinded, especially in light of the Washington Free Beacon’s recent disclosure that the Department of Energy allegedly hid documents from a 2023 draft study that would have made the liquefied natural gas pause unnecessary in the first place.
In a letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, House Oversight James Comer, (R-Kentucky) recently demanded to know how far the Biden-Harris administration and the department stonewalled relevant documents or scientific studies and whether any actions taken were connected to campaign contributions.
Comer’s letter was followed by a letter to Secretary Granholm from a group of House leaders, led by Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas), raising additional concerns over the apparent lack of transparency. Their letter asks not just about the timeline of the draft 2023 report but also about the supposed 2024 report and why such information hasn’t been made available yet.
Again, these are fair questions. We hope politics didn’t play a role in policymaking, but the publicly available information suggests otherwise. The probe is justified, but even if it finds nothing, the export pause is still a bad idea.
Liquefied natural gas is a critical ingredient in the future global energy mix. Increased reliance on it will lead to a reduction in carbon emissions globally, which is precisely the environmental movement’s goal. America can produce it in abundance, which will help stabilize geopolitical crises that revolve around the world’s need for abundant energy from clean sources to fuel the future.
Peter Roff is former U.S. News and World Report contributing editor and UPI senior political writer now affiliated with several DC-based public policy organizations. He writes for numerous publications and appears regularly on international television talking about U.S. politics. You can reach him at RoffColumns@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @TheRoffDraft.