Energy Transfer revealed this in its annual report filed with the US SEC last week.
In December 2025, Energy Transfer announced, in a surprising move, that it suspended the project and will focus on allocating capital to its “significant backlog of natural gas pipeline infrastructure projects that Energy Transfer believes provide superior risk/return profiles.”
Energy Transfer’s Lake Charles LNG project seeks to convert its existing regasification terminal to an LNG export facility.
It has a proposed liquefaction capacity of 16.45 mtpa and includes three trains and also modifications to the Trunkline Gas pipeline.
Last year, Lake Charles LNG signed a heads of agreement with MidOcean Energy, the LNG unit of US-based energy investor EIG, which provided a non-binding framework for the joint development of the LNG project.
Pursuant to the HoA, MidOcean would commit to fund 30 percent of the construction cost and be entitled to 30 percent of the LNG production, or about five mtpa.
In addition, Lake Charles signed twenty-year SPAs with Kyushu Electric Power and Chevron.
FID not reached
From 2022 through 2025, Lake Charles LNG Export executed several LNG offtake agreements, which allowed either party to terminate the agreement if Lake Charles LNG did not satisfy specified conditions by a specified date, Ebergy Transfer said in the annual report.
One of those conditions related to Lake Charles LNG Export making a final investment decision to proceed with the construction of the liquefaction project, the company said.
Energ Transfer noted that it remains open to discussions with third parties who may have an interest in developing the project.
In the event that a third party assumes the development of the project, it is unlikely that Energy Transfer would commit capital to the project; however, Energy Transfer would be interested in providing natural gas pipeline transportation capacity to a third party under a long term agreement to facilitate natural gas supply to the project, it said.
As a result of Energy Transfer’s announcement in December last year, several LNG offtake agreements have been terminated based on the non-satisfaction of the condition related
to making a final investment decision by the date specified in the applicable LNG offtake agreement, the firm said.
Energy Transfer did not say which agreements have been terminated.
Other LNG offtake agreements that have not been terminated could be assumed by a third party which continues the development of the project, the firm said.
Other options
Energy Transfer’s management said during the company’s earnings call last week that the company is also exploring other projects to better utilize the Lake Charles LG terminal in a “more profitable way.”
Marshall McCrea, co-CEO and director of Energy Transfer, taht there is no limit to what we are looking at.”
“It could be NGLs, a crude oil terminal, or it could accommodate other commodities,” he said.
“We will see how it plays out, but certainly, as I said, we look at all of our assets, and that is such a great location. It has a really good draft and a really good terminal, and we do expect it to create some kind of business going forward in that terminal,” McCrea said.
