US industry hits at LNG export plan US industrial companies have urged the federal government to scrutinise plans for new facilities for exporting natural gas from the US, fearing that they could drive up prices and erode the energy cost advantage that benefits US-based manufacturers. The shale boom, caused by the development of resources that were previously uncommercial, has driven down the price of US gas, which is only about $3 per million British thermal units now, and a little over $5 in the forward market for 2017. That makes exporting liquefied natural gas from the US to Asia and Europe look highly attractive. The first LNG export project in the US, the Sabine Pass plant in Louisiana, owned by Cheniere Energy, won approval from the US Department of Energy last year. Seven more have submitted applications. Together, they have asked for permission to ship 10.9bn cubic feet per day to markets worldwide; about 18 per cent of US gas production. The DoE, with input from its own Energy Information Administration and private sector consultants, is trying to assess what effect those projects might have on US natural gas prices. Findings could be published next week. Already though, US users of natural gas, and of electricity which tends to be tied to gas prices, have raised concerns that higher export demand could drive up their costs. Klaus Kleinfeld, chairman and chief executive of Alcoa, the US aluminium group that is a heavy user of energy, told the Financial Times: "The big issue is how much of the shale gas will be staying in country." He drew a parallel with the huge gasfields in Western Australia being developed for export to Asia, which he described as "potentially dangerous" for the Australian economy. He added: "I think you have to really be very conscious about how you want to use the resources." Do you want to allow them to all leave the country, and basically be helpful as an export good, but not produce much as a secondary employment impact? If you use very competitive energy, you open up opportunities for a lot of industries to expand here. He suggested the government should not ban LNG exports but set limits instead. The Industrial Energy Consumers of America, a group representing energy-intensive manufacturers, has called for a separate study of market impact to be done for each new proposed export project. Paul Cicio, the IECA's president, said: "We don't object to exports of natural gas. What we do have concerns about is accepting permit applications without a thorough analysis. Some analysts argue that the impact of LNG will be small. Amber McCullagh of Wood Mackenzie said she expected it to be "dimes rather than dollars," and predicted that rising LNG production in other regions such as Australia and Africa would help erode the profitability of US exports. Mary Barcella of IHS argued that the most important factor driving up gas prices would be the need for producers to cover costs, and given the large estimated size of US shale gas resources, even substantially higher exports would make little difference. However, gas consumers worry that projections of long-term abundant supplies cannot necessarily be taken on trust. Mr Cicio said: "These export contracts are at minimum 20 year commitments to supply. Just think about how much can change in 20 years. We are demanding that the department of energy takes a prudent view.