Gas industry obstruction in US federal energy regulatory filings

• In Event: Toward the Energy Transition: Policy Design and Challenges in Energy Use and Infrastructure

Abstract

Increasing fossil fuel use is incompatible with preventing catastrophic climate change. However, the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) continues to approve new fossil fuel infrastructure despite known climate harms. To understand the regulatory dynamics underlying fossil energy buildout, this research analyzes filings from the US’s largest fracked gas producer, EQT, and FERC during the construction of a highly contested gas pipeline, the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP), through the Appalachian region of the US between 2014-2024. I conducted a qualitative analysis by hand of 3,920 digitally archived FERC filings by MVP and FERC from 2014-2024 using Kinol et al's (2025) Discourses of Climate Denial and Delay to evaluate the nature and extent of misleading and misinformative in MVP filings. The results show that MVP uses all but one of the obstructive Discourses to greenwash fracked gas and pipeline construction in regulatory proceedings. Unexpectedly, this analysis further finds that regulators accept these claims, rather than pushing back, and repeat them in staff filings and FERC Orders, showing procedural susceptibility to greenwashing that obstructs climate action. Regulatory vulnerability to greenwashing narratives is exacerbated by current regulatory practices: marginalization of community and environmental organization input, reliance on the regulated industry for technical expertise, and implicit assumptions of the inevitability and public benefit of fracked gas pipelines. These findings  call into question energy regulators’ ability to disregard misleading and misinformative and regulate in the public interest and suggest corporate capture of FERC. To advance a US energy transition, regulatory process reforms that mitigate the impact of obstructive claims in filings are necessary, but the dominance of fossil-fuel interests in US federal politics makes reforms unlikely. This case study remains highly relevant as EQT is currently advancing the Southgate extension of the MVP through the federal regulatory process, despite a similar project also proposed for the same region, and in light of FERC's power over highly contested fossil-fueled data center buildout in the same region.

Author

• Alaina D Kinol, Emory University
  Presenting Author