Here’s a bold statement: The future of liquefied natural gas (LNG) deliveries is hanging in the balance, and Chevron is stepping in to ensure it doesn’t get left in the cold. But here’s where it gets controversial: Chevron is demanding a say in whether Venture Global’s new LNG plant, Plaquemines LNG, should delay its launch—a move that could reshape the energy landscape. Why? Because Chevron fears history might repeat itself, and it doesn’t want to end up like BP, Shell, or Eni, whose LNG shipments were significantly delayed while Venture Global profited from spot market sales.
Venture Global has asked regulators to push back the official start of Plaquemines LNG from 2026 to 2027, citing lingering effects from the COVID-19 pandemic five years ago. This plant, with a massive capacity of 27.2 million tons of LNG per year, is a cornerstone of Venture Global’s operations. In a statement, the company reassured stakeholders that this delay wouldn’t affect its publicly announced timelines for commercial operations in Phase 1 and Phase 2. And this is the part most people miss: While Venture Global insists it’s business as usual, Chevron isn’t taking any chances.
Chevron’s concern stems from a troubling pattern. When Venture Global delayed the commissioning of its first LNG plant, Calcasieu Pass, it argued that the delay freed it from long-term contract obligations, allowing it to sell LNG on the spot market instead. This strategy worked in Shell’s arbitration case against Venture Global, where the court sided with the LNG producer. However, BP wasn’t as forgiving—it’s now seeking over $1 billion in compensation in a separate arbitration case. Here’s the kicker: Long-term clients are collectively demanding over $4 billion in damages from Venture Global, and the company has warned that unfavorable rulings could lead to contract cancellations and accelerated loan repayments.
Given this backdrop, Chevron’s preemptive move to clarify the security of its future LNG deliveries from Plaquemines LNG is hardly surprising. In its statement, Chevron emphasized its substantial interest in the outcome of this regulatory proceeding. But the bigger question remains: Will Venture Global’s delay strategy hold up again, or will Chevron and other energy giants force a different outcome?
Controversial question for you: Is Venture Global’s approach a clever business strategy or a risky gamble that undermines long-term partnerships? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below. The energy world is watching, and the stakes have never been higher.
