Galveston Approves Site Agreement for LNG Production and Marine Fuel Facility
Power LNG has secured a port lease and development agreement for a 30-acre Pelican Island project, with production, storage, pipeline and marine-fueling infrastructure planned.
The Galveston Wharves Board of Trustees has approved a lease and development agreement with Power LNG for an LNG production, storage and bunkering facility on Pelican Island. The October 8 decision establishes a site-development pathway for the proposed industrial and marine infrastructure.
The project would occupy part of an approximately 82-acre port-owned tract beside deepwater Galveston Harbor. Plans call for two 200,000-gallon-per-day liquefaction trains, an underground gas-feed pipeline, storage and a shore-to-ship fueling pier. Expansion to twice the initial production rate remains a future option.
Project at a Glance
- Site:
- 30 acres on Pelican Island
- Initial production plan:
- 400,000 gallons per day
- Expansion potential:
- 800,000 gallons per day
- LNG storage:
- 3 million gallons
- Agreement approved:
- October 8, 2026
Land, process plant and waterfront interfaces
TCH’s construction assessment is that this project needs to be followed as a linked series of packages. The feed connection, production equipment, storage and vessel interface have distinct functions, but commercial operation depends on them working together. Completion of one component would not by itself establish readiness to supply ships.
The marine interface adds a further layer to a conventional land-based industrial development. Construction planning must connect the plant with safe and usable waterside infrastructure. No marine-contractor or EPC appointment is confirmed in the reviewed port announcement, and a specific package should not be presented as awarded without that evidence.
A lease milestone, not an operating terminal
The approval is significant because it moves the proposal beyond an unsecured location. It should still be kept separate from final financing, permits, construction completion and operating readiness. The announcement does not publish a complete construction contract value or a dated mobilization program.
Earlier reporting put LNG production in late 2028, with potential earlier bunkering activity. That remains a planning target rather than a guaranteed commercial-service date. A distinction between fuel delivered from elsewhere and LNG actually produced onsite will be essential when future startup announcements arrive.
The next procurement questions
TCH will track the process-plant delivery structure, storage-tank package, pipeline works and waterfront construction. Those are areas implied by the confirmed physical scope, not a claim that invitations to bid have been issued.
A firm delivery program would also explain which expansion provisions are incorporated into the first phase. Reserving space or interfaces for a later train is different from authorizing the full 800,000-gallon-per-day buildout. Keeping those phases separate will make cost and progress reporting more useful.