A preprint, which is a non-peer reviewed study, that was widely cited in support of the Biden-Harris administration's pause on liquified natural gas (LNG) export permits was published Thursday after going through peer review. While the preprint claimed LNG produces 247% more emissions than coal, the peer-reviewed version now claims it’s only 33%.

“Even considered on the time frame of 100 years after emission … which severely understates the climatic damage of methane, the LNG footprint equals or exceeds that of coal,” the study states.

The study was authored by Cornell University climate scientist Robert Howarth, who openly advocates for the rapid elimination of fossil fuels. An analysis published in August by the Breakthrough Institute found a number of errors in the work. Howarth told Just the News in August that he did not agree with the analysis’s findings, and he stood by the validity of his research.

“This is further confirmation that the LNG export pause, which has caused our allies to rethink the stability of the United States as an energy partner, was based on shoddy science that was produced purely to deliver an anti-energy outcome,” Jeff Eshelman, president and CEO of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, an industry group, said in a statement.

The updated figure is not the first time Howarth’s findings were updated. According to the Breakthrough analysis, it’s happened several times. In May, Howarth’s study claimed that LNG produced as much as 64% more greenhouse gas emissions than coal on a 100-year time frame. 

In January, the White House announced a temporary pause on pending decisions of exports of liquefied natural gas to non-free trade countries, until the the Energy Department can factor climate change into its reviews of the projects.