US gas producers may struggle to meet LNG demand

Spanish Market: Electricity, Natural gas
18/07/24

US natural gas producers looking to become the primary suppliers to increasingly dependent overseas markets may still need to overcome tight pipeline capacity, volatility in oil markets and even growing competition from the US power sector.

Large producers such as EQT and Chesapeake Energy are banking that the rapid buildout of LNG export capacity will connect the US to higher-priced markets and provide an outlet for a glut of US supply. At the same time, European buyers are depending on US gas to help wean the continent off Russian supplies since the Russia-Ukraine war broke out in 2022. But questions remain about the ability of US producers to feed the rapid expansion.

The US already leads the world in LNG exports and is on pace to double that capacity later this decade. US baseload LNG export capacity was forecast to increase to 21.1 Bcf/d by the end of 2027, about one fifth of today's total lower-48 US gas production, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). By 2030, Shell expects US LNG production will meet about 5pc of global gas demand and 30pc of global LNG demand.

But to satisfy a world that much more reliant on US shipments of gas, US producers have to significantly grow output and build the pipelines needed to connect subterranean shale basins to the US Gulf coast, where almost all the US liquefaction capacity will be located. East Daley Analytics director Jack Weixel said regulatory challenges to permitting those pipelines threaten the US' ability to rapidly boost its LNG exports regardless of who is elected president in November.

Growing pains

There are unique challenges to raising production in all three of the US' biggest gas-producing formations — the Appalachian basins, the Permian basin of west Texas and southeast New Mexico, and the Haynesville shale of east Texas and northern Louisiana.

In Appalachia, developers have almost entirely lost faith in their ability to secure the permits necessary to build new interstate pipelines, so incremental LNG demand will probably not be met by Appalachian gas. The Permian is the US' most prolific oil field, making it an unreliable associated gas producer; a dim outlook for crude prices would mechanically slash gas output. And in the less mature Haynesville, there are "a lot of open questions on how deep that inventory is and how much (it) can actually grow," Citi equity analyst Paul Diamond said.

The threat to building new pipelines is not solely the domain of regulators, either, but can even come from within the industry itself, as US midstream giant Energy Transfer has shown over the past year by trying to block several new pipelines out of the Haynesville. Some of Energy Transfer's opponents have warned the legal dispute could hamper the gas production growth needed in the Haynesville to meet the US' coming LNG boom.

Permitting aside, some analysts consulted by Argus expressed concern about the integrity of the US gas pipeline network itself, whether due to accidents or ransomware attacks, such as that which targeted the Colonial oil products pipeline in May 2021, disrupting fuel deliveries into the eastern US.

Powerful competition

Meeting booming LNG demand could be even harder if domestic gas needs exceed expectations. Gas producers and power generators eager to serve data centers running emergent artificial intelligence software have indicated that might be the case.

EQT, the largest US gas producer by volume, in its most aggressive data center build-out scenario envisioned an 18 Bcf/d (510mn m³/d) increase in gas demand to generate electricity through 2030, while US gas pipeline operator Kinder Morgan forecast an increase between 7-10 Bcf/d. Goldman Sachs and consultancy Enverus forecast more modest increases of 3.3 Bcf/d and 2 Bcf/d, respectively.

The US power sector consumed a record-high 35.4 Bcf/d of gas in 2023, the EIA said. About 43pc of US utility-scale electricity was generated by gas.

EQT may be biased. But if its forecast is accurate, US gas producers may not be able to meet all that new demand while also exporting double what the US is exporting today, FactSet analyst Connor McLean said. In that case, a high-demand scenario like EQT's could leave the US gas market undersupplied, boosting US gas prices and closing the spot price arbitrage between US pipeline gas and global LNG, which has mostly been wide open for years.

In response to elevated prices at the US gas benchmark, Henry Hub, overseas buyers might find themselves canceling US cargoes — if their supply contracts allow for it — eating the requisite liquefaction fee and taking delivery of a cargo from Qatar or Russia instead.

Not so fast

The caveat to risks of an undersupplied US gas market is that official timelines of when LNG export terminals are expected to enter service on the US Gulf coast may be overly optimistic. Texas' planned 18.1mn t/yr Golden Pass LNG delaying first LNG on the heels of its lead contractor going bankrupt is just one recent example of this.

"All that does is give producers a little bit more time to get production to where it needs to be," Weixel said.

By Julian Hast

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

24/04/25

Investment funds slash net long position on Ice TTF

London, 24 April (Argus) — Investment funds have slashed their TTF net long positions on the Intercontinental Exchange (Ice) nearly in half so far in April, with commercial undertakings' net long position conversely rising. Investment funds' net long position on Ice dropped to 86TWh in the week ending 17 April, well below the 146TWh at the end of March, and was as low as 73TWh on 11 April ( see net positions graph ). The near-halving of their net position was driven entirely by the closing of longs, which dropped to 308TWh by 17 April from 383TWh on 28 March. In contrast, shorts dropped by only 16TWh in the same period, the exchange's most recent Commitments of Traders report shows. This left investment funds' total amount of open positions at 529TWh by 17 April, well down from 620TWh on 28 March. Global commodity market turmoil in recent weeks following the US' ‘liberation day' on which president Donald Trump announced tariffs on nearly every country may have prompted funds to reduce their exposure to gas market. The resulting fallout in global commodity, stock, bond and currency markets would have hit multi-strategy hedge funds in particular, which had exposure to many different assets, some of which are thought to be among the largest players in the overall investment fund category of participant. Wider macroeconomic factors rather than market fundamentals have driven the TTF this month, according to many traders, with daily TTF movements frequently having tracked wider moves across global macroeconomic indicators such as the S&P 500 index. In contrast with investment funds' sharply reduced net long position, commercial undertakings — the other largest category of market participant, mostly comprising firms with retail portfolios — more than doubled their net long position to 85TWh on 17 April from 33TWh on 28 March. This means commercial undertakings' and investment funds' net positions now have nearly exactly converged, with the difference between them having been as wide as nearly 350TWh as recently as early February. Commercial undertakings first flipped to a net long position in the week ending 28 February, and the net long has steadily increased every week since then. While investment funds significantly reduced their overall exposure to the TTF, commercial undertakings increased both their long and short positions in April. Total shorts rose by about 34TWh between 28 March and 17 April to 1.055PWh, while longs soared by 86TWh to 1.140PWh. This leaves their total open positions at about 2.195PWh, more than quadruple investment funds' 529TWh. The data could suggest that commercial undertakings took advantage of hedge funds unwinding their long positions, leading to a reallocation of about 90TWh of liquidity from speculative positions to risk reduction contracts. The large majority of commercial undertakings' overall open positions are risk reduction contracts, which total 1.457PWh out of aggregate open positions of 2.195PWh, or 66pc. In contrast, investment funds hold zero risk reduction contracts, making it likely that all of their interest is speculative. Commercial undertakings' risk reduction shorts increased only by about 7TWh between 28 March and 17 April to 747TWh, but longs soared by 92TWh over the same period to an all-time high of 710TWh. As recently as 28 February, risk reduction longs were as low as 550TWh, meaning an overall increase of nearly 200TWh in less than two months. The only other time in recent history when risk reduction longs increased at such a rapid pace was in 2018, when they jumped from 445TWh on 30 July to a peak of 644TWh on 15 October ( see risk reduction graph ). One explanation for such a distinct increase in risk reduction longs while shorts remained roughly even could simply be that utilities have purchased winter contracts instead of the more usual practice of hedging physical gas bought for summer injection by selling winter contracts. Typically, summer prices are below winter thanks to lower seasonal consumption, so a utility would buy the summer to inject the gas and sell the winter for when it will be withdrawn, locking in a profit margin. But because summer prices this year remained above winter, there was no commercial incentive to lock in a negative spread, meaning utilities may simply have opted to buy winter contracts to cover their expected demand. But since the turn of April, TTF summer-month prices have increased their discount to the front-winter, providing more of an incentive to inject gas. By Brendan A'Hearn Net positions on ICE TTF TWh Commercial undertakings' risk reduction positions TWh Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Eni cuts capex on macro headwinds, tariff uncertainty

24/04/25

Eni cuts capex on macro headwinds, tariff uncertainty

London, 24 April (Argus) — Italy's Eni has cut its spending plans for this year in response to macroeconomic headwinds, uncertainty around trade tariffs and a lower oil price outlook. The company is planning a series of "mitigation measures" worth over €2bn [$2.28bn], a key element of which is a reduction in 2025 capex to below €8.5bn from previous guidance of €9bn. Eni now expects net capex — which takes into account acquisitions and asset sales — to come in below €6bn this year, compared with its initial plan of €6.5bn-7bn. Other savings will come from "mitigating actions" around its portfolio, operating costs and "other cash initiatives", the firm said. Eni's plan reflects a tariff-driven deterioration in the outlook for the global economy and, in turn, global oil demand and oil prices. The company has revised its Brent crude price assumption for 2025 down to $65/bl from $75/bl previously. It has also lowered its refining margin indicator assumption for the year to $3.5/bl from $4.7/bl. The lower oil price assumption has not changed the company's upstream production forecast — it still expects 2025 output to average 1.7mn b/d of oil equivalent (boe/d). But Eni's production in the first quarter was only 1.65mn boe/d, 5pc lower than the same period last year. The firm's gas production took the biggest hit, falling by 9pc on the year to 4.5bn ft³/d (861,000 boe/d) as a result of divestments and natural decline at mature fields. Liquids output fell by 1pc year on year to 786,000 boe/d. Eni reported a profit of €1.17bn for January-March, 3pc lower than the same period last year. Underlying profit— which strips out inventory valuation effects and other one off-items — fell by 11pc on the year to €1.41bn. Eni said the fall in profits was mainly due to lower oil prices. The company also had to contend with weaker refining margins and throughputs, as well as a continuing downturn in the European chemicals sector. By Aydin Calik Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US states including New York sue Trump over tariffs

23/04/25

US states including New York sue Trump over tariffs

New York, 23 April (Argus) — A coalition of 12 states including New York is suing the administration of President Donald Trump for imposing "illegal" tariffs that threaten to raise inflation and derail economic growth. The lawsuit, filed by attorneys general from the 12 states, argues that Congress has not granted the president the authority to impose the tariffs and the administration violated the law by imposing them through executive orders, social media posts, and agency orders. "President Trump's reckless tariffs have skyrocketed costs for consumers and unleashed economic chaos across the country," said New York governor Kathy Hochul (D). "New York is standing up to fight back against the largest federal tax hike in American history." The lawsuit alleges the tariffs will increase unemployment, threaten wages by slowing economic growth and push up the cost of key goods from electronics to building materials. The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States Court of International Trade, seeks a court order halting the tariffs. By Stephen Cunningham Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Tariffs could cut FY profit $100mn-$200mn: Baker Hughes

23/04/25

Tariffs could cut FY profit $100mn-$200mn: Baker Hughes

New York, 23 April (Argus) — Oilfield services giant Baker Hughes expects a cut in its annual profit of as much as $200mn from tariffs, if current levels applied under President Donald Trump's 90-day pause stay in place for the rest of the year. That hit to profits does not include secondary effects, such as the impact of Trump's trade wars on slower global economic growth, as well as a renewed bout of weakness in oil prices. While the company is taking steps to mitigate tariff impacts, its "strong weighting" to international markets helps reduce its overall financial exposure, according to chief executive officer Lorenzo Simonelli. Increased oil price volatility due to tariffs , as well as the return of Opec+ barrels to the market, have resulted in a softening outlook for the market. As such, Baker Hughes now expects global upstream spending will be "down by high single digits" this year. The company forecasts a low-double digit decline in North America spending by its clients, and a mid-to-high single digit drop internationally. "A sustained move lower in oil prices or worsening tariffs would introduce further downside risk to this outlook," said Simonelli. "The prospects of an oversupplied oil market, rising tariffs, uncertainty in Mexico and activity weakness in Saudi Arabia are collectively constraining international upstream spending levels." The company has identified three areas of tariff exposure within its industrial and energy technology division, including volumes exported to China, critical equipment supplies from its facilities in Italy, and an expected modest impact from steel and aluminum tariffs as well as US-China trade activity. Mitigation efforts include exploring domestic procurement alternatives to reduce input costs and improving its global manufacturing footprint. In relation to its oilfield services and equipment segment, Baker Hughes has been working to boost domestic sourcing and is working with customers to recover some costs. Elsewhere, the repeal of an US LNG permitting moratorium under the Trump administration has resulted in higher orders. Baker Hughes has booked about $1.7bn in LNG orders in the US over the past two quarters, and several LNG customers in the Gulf Coast have signaled plans to expand capacity beyond 2030. Profit of $402mn in the first quarter was down from $455mn in the year-earlier period. Revenue held steady at about $6.4bn. By Stephen Cunningham Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US generators weigh delaying coal plant retirements

23/04/25

US generators weigh delaying coal plant retirements

New York, 23 April (Argus) — US utilities are considering additional extensions to coal plant retirements in response to recent policy changes, even though the benefit for the coal industry may be short-lived. US utilities are still mostly reviewing US president Donald Trump's executive orders issued earlier this month plus other actions initiated by his administration. One of the more concrete recent actions were the two-year exemptions from complying with updated Mercury and Air Toxics Standards granted to dozens of power plants on 15 April. But even though utilities had applied for these exemptions, the majority of those that spoke to Argus indicated they are still evaluating their options. "Granting a two-year compliance extension at Labadie and Sioux will enable Ameren Missouri to further refine its compliance strategy and optimize planned monitoring mechanisms to ensure accuracy," said Ameren Missouri director of environmental services Craig Giesmann. "We are committed to selecting cost-effective solutions that minimize the impact on customer rates." Ameren's 1,099MW Sioux plant is scheduled to be closed by 2028 and the 2,389MW Labadie plant has no concrete retirement date. Tennessee Valley Authority said it is "carefully reviewing" the mercury and air toxics exemptions "for how it might apply and benefit our efforts to support load growth across our seven-state region." The federal utility was granted exemptions for all of its coal facilities, including units of the Cumberland and Kingston plants that had been scheduled to close by the 1 July 2027 compliance deadline for the new mercury and air toxics standards. NRG Energy and Xcel Energy also said they are still considering how to proceed. "It will take our regulatory and environmental teams some time to evaluate and access the new guidelines, so we do not have any update to share at this time," NRG said. The utility was granted exemptions for four coal plants with a combined 7,092MW of capacity. None of these units currently has concrete retirement dates scheduled. Companies need to take into account other factors before committing to extending a coal unit's life, including natural gas price expectations and whether government regulations will stay in place. In addition, the planning process for retiring and adding generating assets takes time. These factors also are being taken into account by utilities that do not have coal units on the list of mercury rule exemptions but could be affected by other efforts the Trump administration is making to try to preserve coal generation. "Whatever impacts may arise from policy changes this year will be assessed in a future [Integrated Resource Plan], with the best analysis of information available at that time," utility PacifiCorp said. The utility just filed its latest integrated resource plan with state regulators on 31 March and does not expect to file another one until early 2027. Another utility that did not have coal units on the list of mercury rule exemptions but would be affected by other regulatory actions said it is considering extending coal unit operations by a few years. A US coal producer reported receiving increased inquiries from utilities about the feasibility of continuing to get coal supply beyond power plant units' planned retirement dates. Both buyers and sellers that talked to Argus agree that contract flexibility is gaining importance. But "even if you roll back some regulations and push deadlines on various retirements and certain requirements out into the future, you still can not justify taking more coal unless it is going to be competitive" with natural gas, one market participant said. While profit margins for dispatching coal in US electric grids were above natural gas spark spreads for a number of days this past winter, that was an anomaly when compared with recent years. Coal may bridge generating gap But recent policy changes could help utilities use coal generation to bridge any gaps in generating capacity caused by delays in bringing other energy sources online. These include possible delays in adding solar generation following increased tariffs the Trump administration has imposed on imports from China as well as legislation moving through some state governing bodies aimed at inhibiting renewable projects. On 15 April, the Texas Senate passed a bill that would impose restrictions on solar and wind projects, including new permits, fees, regulatory requirements, and taxes. Separately, North Carolina legislators are reviewing a bill that proposes reducing solar tax breaks from 80pc to 40pc and limiting locations for utility-scale projects. Other states are moving forward with efforts to encourage less carbon-intensive generation. Colorado governor Jared Polis (D) on 31 March signed legislation classifying nuclear energy as a "clean" power source. Increased renewable energy generating capacity still is expected to be the "main contributor" to growth in US electricity generation, according to the US Energy Information Administration's (EIA) Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO). But EIA's latest outlook did not take into account the coal-related executive orders Trump signed on 8 April. "We are currently evaluating these developments, and they will be reflected in the May STEO," EIA chief economist Jonathan Church said. Most market participants do not expect substantial long-term changes to come from recent coal-supporting efforts because of various other factors including the fundamental economics of coal-fired power plants. By Elena Vasilyeva Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more