Ineos, the private petrochemical company owned by billionaire Jim Ratcliffe, has quietly built the dominant position in the global trade of fracked ethane gas — a business that barely existed a decade ago. New analysis from the Center for International Environmental Law shows Ineos controls at least two-thirds of all US ethane exports, having grown shipment volumes 7.3-fold since 2016 when it completed a $2bn fleet of eight "dragon ships" to haul the gas across the Atlantic. Total volumes shipped by or for the company grew from 429 kilotonnes in 2016 to 3,130 kilotonnes in 2025. The supply chain begins in Washington County, Pennsylvania, one of the most heavily fracked counties in the state with 6,075 gas wells packed into 861 square miles. Ineos holds a 15-year supply deal with Range Resources, a major US gas producer. Ethane — a co-product of oil and gas fracking — is shipped to Ineos petrochemical plants in Rafnes, Norway and Grangemouth, Scotland, where it is converted into ethylene, the building block for most plastics. CIEL identified 790 shipments of US-sourced ethane on Ineos-branded vessels between March 2016 and November 2025. The regulatory architecture here is the real story. Fracking is banned across much of Europe due to environmental and seismic risks, but no equivalent restriction prevents the import and use of fracked gas. Ineos has exploited this gap systematically. Its planned Project One facility in Antwerp, Belgium — which would be Europe's largest plastic factory — is designed to consume approximately two million tonnes of ethane annually, sourced from US fracking operations. The UK government has underwritten the project with a €700m bank guarantee through UK Export Finance. The health costs are borne thousands of miles from the boardrooms. Research from the University of Pittsburgh found that children living within one mile of a fracking well had approximately five to seven times the chance of developing lymphoma compared with children five miles away. Lois Bower-Bjornson, a campaigner at the Clean Air Council surrounded by 36 fracking wells in Washington County, describes her children suffering rashes, severe nosebleeds, and anaemia. A 2020 Pennsylvania grand jury criticised the US government for failing to protect residents, but the recommended health investigation has not materialised. The legal front is now active. ClientEarth and 14 NGOs are challenging Ineos over Project One, arguing the environmental impact assessment fails to account for upstream scope 3 emissions from US fracking. This week, the issue was escalated to the EU's highest court, which has been asked to clarify whether Ineos must quantify the full climate impact of its supply chain when seeking a permit. Courts worldwide have increasingly ruled that scope 3 emissions belong in environmental assessments — a legal trajectory that could undermine Project One's approval. Ineos responds that it does not own or operate wells in Pennsylvania, that its ethane comes from "many independent producers," and that Project One's two million tonnes would represent just 3% of US ethane production. The company says it has updated Project One's environmental assessment and subjected it to "extensive regulatory scrutiny." These arguments are technically accurate and structurally evasive — they describe the supply chain's legal distance without addressing its physical and environmental continuity. The UK government's position contains its own contradiction. UK Export Finance says the €700m guarantee "creates new export opportunities for British businesses" while "remaining consistent with our commitment to the global transition to net zero." CIEL calls this a "deep contradiction" between the UK's pledge to end overseas fossil fuel finance and its backing of a project built entirely on fossil-fuel-derived feedstock. The guarantee socialises financial risk while privatising the profits of an infrastructure lock-in designed to last decades.
