The Case for Expanded Infrastructure
U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright delivered a clear and forceful message at the 2025 CERAWeek energy conference in Houston: the nation must expand its oil and gas infrastructure if it wants to meet growing energy demands and maintain economic stability. Speaking before an audience of energy executives, industry leaders, and government officials, Wright made it clear that increasing production alone is not enough—without the necessary pipelines, storage facilities, and export terminals, the United States risks bottlenecks that could limit supply, drive up costs, and weaken its position in the global energy market.
“If ‘Drill, baby, drill’ is going to lower energy costs, we’re going to have to ‘Build, baby, build,’” Wright said, emphasizing the need for significant investment in infrastructure to support growing oil and natural gas production. He specifically pointed to constrained pipeline capacity in regions such as the Marcellus and Bakken shale formations, where the lack of transportation infrastructure prevents producers from bringing more natural gas to market.
The urgency of these infrastructure improvements is underscored by the dramatic rise in energy consumption driven by artificial intelligence, supercomputers, and digital economies. A 2024 report by S&P Global Ratings estimated that U.S. data centers’ increasing energy demands “will lead to additional gas demand of between 3 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) and 6 bcf/d by 2030, from a starting point of almost none today.” Wright made it clear that failing to expand infrastructure now could lead to future shortages and higher prices for consumers.
What Infrastructure Is Needed?
According to Wright, several key projects must be prioritized to meet the Trump administration’s energy goals:
- New and expanded pipelines to transport natural gas and crude oil from production sites to refineries and end markets.
- LNG export terminals along the Gulf Coast to enable the U.S. to supply global markets with natural gas.
- Compression and metering stations to optimize flow and efficiency in the natural gas supply chain.
- More combined-cycle power plants to ensure stable electricity generation as demand continues to increase.
Wright pointed to the ongoing issue of high energy prices in New England, which lacks the necessary pipelines to bring in abundant natural gas from Pennsylvania. “It makes little sense that natural gas is so expensive in New England when they are right next to Pennsylvania,” he said. This problem, he argued, is not due to a lack of supply but a failure to build the infrastructure needed to transport that supply efficiently.
Support from the Trump Administration
The Trump administration has made domestic energy production a top priority, with a strong emphasis on expanding infrastructure. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, also present at CERAWeek, reinforced that infrastructure development is central to President Trump’s energy strategy.
“The Trump administration will end the Biden administration’s irrational, quasi-religious policies on climate change that impose endless sacrifices on our citizens,” Wright declared. He criticized the previous administration for creating unnecessary regulatory barriers that made it difficult for producers to obtain permits for drilling, pipeline construction, and other energy projects.
Wright also took direct aim at the Biden administration’s decision in 2024 to pause liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports while conducting a study on their impact. He claimed that the Department of Energy’s summary of the study misrepresented its own findings. “The summary does not match the data,” Wright asserted, further arguing that the study failed to consider how increased natural gas production could offset the projected cost increases for domestic consumers.
To reinforce the Trump administration’s commitment to infrastructure expansion, Wright signed an order at the conference approving an LNG export permit extension for Delfin LNG LLC, allowing it to begin exports from its offshore Louisiana terminal. The Biden administration had previously delayed this approval. Wright stated this was just one of several LNG-related permits that the Trump administration had approved since taking office.
Global and Industry Reactions
Wright’s call for expanded infrastructure was met with strong support from the energy industry. Executives from major firms, including Chevron, Shell, BP, and Saudi Aramco, agreed that infrastructure investment is crucial for ensuring a stable and competitive energy market. Many industry leaders view the Trump administration’s approach as a necessary corrective measure after years of regulatory obstacles under the previous administration.
International energy ministers from countries such as Nigeria, Libya, and Kazakhstan also expressed approval of the U.S. push to expand energy infrastructure. As global energy demand continues to grow, especially in developing nations, American oil and gas are seen as vital to meeting those needs. Wright pointed out that millions of people around the world still rely on burning wood and biomass for heating and cooking, leading to serious health and environmental issues. “Where is the COP conference for this far more urgent global challenge?” he asked, taking a swipe at international climate summits that prioritize carbon reduction over energy accessibility.
However, not all responses were positive. European officials and climate activists voiced concerns that doubling down on fossil fuel infrastructure would undermine global efforts to transition to renewable energy sources.
Criticism from Environmental Advocates
Environmental groups immediately pushed back against Wright’s infrastructure plans, arguing that investing in more pipelines and fossil fuel facilities would delay the shift to cleaner energy.
“Building more pipelines locks us into decades of continued fossil fuel dependence when we should be accelerating clean energy alternatives,” said Lisa Hamilton, a spokesperson for Climate Action Now. Many climate advocates argue that wind and solar power, which are becoming increasingly cost-competitive, should be prioritized instead.
Wright, however, dismissed these concerns, referring to himself as a “climate realist” rather than a “climate denier.” He argued that energy security and economic development must be balanced with environmental considerations.
“There is simply no physical way that renewable energy sources like wind and solar can replace natural gas in the foreseeable future,” he stated, emphasizing that natural gas is not only crucial for electricity generation but also for manufacturing steel, cement, semiconductors, and fertilizers. “More energy means better lives,” he concluded.
The Road Ahead
The Trump administration’s aggressive push for oil and gas expansion is setting the stage for major debates over energy policy in the coming years. Supporters argue that investing in new pipelines and LNG terminals will lower costs, strengthen America’s energy independence, and create jobs. Critics fear that prioritizing fossil fuels will set back global climate goals and slow down the transition to cleaner alternatives.
The future of U.S. energy policy will depend on a combination of regulatory approvals, investment from the private sector, and the ability of policymakers to navigate the competing interests of economic growth and environmental responsibility.
As the Trump administration moves forward with its energy agenda, one thing is certain: the infrastructure decisions made today will have long-lasting impacts on the country’s energy landscape for decades to come.
