The United States Congress has from time to time considered adopting legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, and there has been a wide-ranging policy debate, both nationally and internationally, regarding the impact of these gases and possible means for their regulation. In addition, efforts have been made and continue to be made in the international community toward the adoption of international treaties or protocols that would address global climate change issues. In 2015, the United States participated in the United Nations Conference on Climate Change, which led to the adoption of the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement became effective November 4, 2016, and requires countries to review and "represent a progression" in their intended nationally determined contributions, which set GHG emission reduction goals, every five years beginning in 2020. In November 2019, the State Department formally informed the United Nations of the United States' withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and withdrew from the agreement in November 2020. However, on January 20, 2021, President Biden signed an instrument that reverses this withdrawal, and the United States formally re-joined the Paris Agreement on February 19, 2021. At the federal regulatory level, both the EPA and the BLM have adopted regulations for the control of methane emissions, which also include leak detection and repair requirements, from the oil and gas industry. Additionally, President Biden has issued an executive order seeking to adopt new regulations and policies to address climate change and suspend, revise, or rescind prior agency actions that are identified as conflicting with the Biden Administration's climate policies.
Governmental, scientific and public concern over the threat of climate change arising from GHG emissions has resulted in increasing political risks in the U.S. President Biden declared that he would support federal government efforts to limit or prohibit hydraulic fracturing and ban new leases for production of minerals on federal properties, including onshore lands and offshore waters. In addition, as discussed under "Item 1. Business-Regulation," on January 20, 2021, the Acting Secretary for the Department of the Interior signed an order suspending new fossil fuel leasing and permitting on federal lands, including offshore pipeline leases, for 60 days. Then on January 27, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order indefinitely suspending new oil and natural gas leases on public lands or in offshore waters pending completion of a comprehensive review and reconsideration of federal oil and gas permitting and leasing practices. Several states filed lawsuits challenging the suspension and on June 15, 2021, a federal judge issued a nationwide temporary injunction blocking the suspension. The Department of the Interior appealed the judge's ruling but resumed oil and gas leasing pending resolution of the appeal. In July 2023, the DOI proposed updates to its onshore oil and gas leasing regulations which could further restrict oil and gas exploration and production on federal lands. The DOI expects to issue a final rule in the spring of 2024. All of these changes and uncertainties could have a negative effect on exploration and production of oil and natural gas and, consequently, negatively impact the demand for our products and services. The Biden administration could also pursue the imposition of more restrictive requirements for the establishment of pipeline infrastructure or the permitting of LNG export facilities.
Over the past few years, the Biden administration has focused on regulating methane emissions in the production of oil and gas, including through venting and flaring. To this end, the EPA, BLM, and other agencies have issued regulations that may require us to make changes to our operations and may require us to pay a fee associated with our methane emissions. Additional regulatory actions targeting methane and other GHG emissions may be put in place in the future. We cannot predict, what effect, if any, such additional actions might have on our operations.
In addition, on January 26, 2024, the Biden Administration announced that it was pausing decisions on applications for new LNG export projects until the Department of Energy is able to adopt new parameters for analyzing the projects. These new parameters would include the review of the economic and environmental effects of new facilities on US climate goals and other factors. While this pause will not affect operating LNG facilities or facilities that have previously secured government approval, it will affect the approval process for future LNG facilities and for expansions of existing facilities. It is uncertain how long the pause will be in place and what changes to the analysis parameters will be adopted. If the pause is in place for an extended period of time or the new parameters adopted result in fewer new LNG projects being built in the future, the growth in LNG exports, which in the past few years has been strong, could be reduced and such reduction could have a negative effect on the price of US natural gas, which, in turn, could have a negative effect on our business and results of operations.
In addition, many states have already taken legal measures to reduce emissions of GHGs, primarily through the planned development of GHG emission inventories and/or regional GHG cap-and-trade programs. Most of these cap and trade programs work by requiring either major sources of emissions, such as electric power plants, or major producers of fuels, such as refineries and NGL fractionation plants, to acquire and surrender emission allowances with the number of allowances available for purchase reduced each year until the overall GHG emission reduction goal is achieved. Certain municipalities have also proposed or enacted restrictions on the installation of natural gas appliances and infrastructure in new residential or commercial construction, which could affect demand for the natural gas and NGL services we provide. Conversely, some other states and municipalities have initiated legal actions or proposed laws that purport to limit actions taken by companies to address GHG emissions or climate change or to respond to pressure from groups described below that promote such actions.
In addition to the regulatory efforts described above, there have also been efforts in recent years aimed at the investment community, including investment advisors, sovereign wealth funds, public pension funds, universities, and other groups, promoting the divestment of fossil fuel equities as well as pressuring lenders and other financial services companies and their regulators, such as the Federal Reserve, to limit or curtail activities with fossil fuel companies. These efforts could have a material adverse effect on the price of our securities and our ability to access equity capital markets. Members of the investment community have begun to screen companies such as ours for sustainability performance, including practices related to GHGs and climate change, before investing in our securities. In addition, discussions of GHG emissions and their possible impacts have become more widespread generally in society and public sentiment regarding these topics may become more challenging for fossil fuel companies. As a result, we could experience additional costs or financial penalties, delayed or cancelled projects, and/or reduced production and reduced demand for hydrocarbons, which could have a material adverse effect on our earnings, cash flows, and financial condition. Furthermore, recent judicial decisions have allowed certain tort claims brought by government and private plaintiffs alleging property damages due to climate change to proceed against GHG emissions sources, which may increase our litigation risk for such claims. Increasing scrutiny and changing expectations from stakeholders with respect to our environmental, social and governance practices may impose additional costs on us or expose us to new or additional risks. We may be unable to include some or all of such increased costs in the rates charged to our customers and any such recovery may depend on events beyond our control, including the outcome of future rate proceedings before the FERC or state regulatory agencies and the provisions of any final legislation or implementing regulations.
Although it is not possible at this time to predict whether future legislation or new regulations may be adopted to address GHG emissions, including to impose taxes or purchase allowances, or how such measures would impact our business, the adoption of legislation or regulations imposing reporting or permitting obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from, our equipment and operations could require us to incur additional costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations, could adversely affect our performance of operations in the absence of any permits that may be required to regulate emission of GHGs, or could adversely affect demand for the natural gas or crude oil we gather, process, or otherwise handle in connection with our services. Moreover, many scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs may produce climate changes associated with an increase in severity and frequency of extreme weather conditions which may affect our operations. See "-Our business is subject to a number of weather-related risks. These weather conditions can cause significant damage and disruption to our operations and adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows" for more information regarding risks from extreme weather conditions.