To: Re: Submitted: Compare the benefits and costs of further LNG exports against one another

DOE Should Weigh the Costs and Benefits of Additional LNG Export and Should Not Approve Further Export Unless It Concludes that the Benefits Justify the Costs DOE has previously conducted analyses of both the lifecycle climate costs4 and macroeconomic benefits5 of LNG exports. [...] To Ensure a Rigorous Assessment of Costs and Benefits, DOE Should Update Its Climate, Economic, and Distributional Analyses of the LNG Export Program To ensure a robust accounting of relevant impacts, DOE should update its analyses of LNG export’s climate and macroeconomic impacts. [...] 13, 2013) (“[I]n the absence of the Project, markets likely would substitute a combination of other LNG and reduced global demand for LNG, including—over the term of the authorization—a range of emitting and non-emitting resources and reduced energy consumption.”) 25 See id. [...] S, which increases the value of the dollar and reduces prices of other imported goods” while also being harmed from rising gas prices due to the reduction in domestic supply.53 Further analysis into the distribution of these benefits and costs would clarify the impacts of LNG export. [...] Elicitation is “a formal, highly-structured and well-documented process for obtaining the judgments of multiple experts.”60 It is preferable to group deliberation because it incorporates the opinions of many experts and avoids the potential for groupthink.61 DOE should employ statistical analysis methods to evaluate the probabilistic judgments of experts in cases of expert disagreement.62 DOE shou.