The ship Pavilion Aranda in Sabine Pass near the US Gulf Coast on June 21, 2023. (Julia Naue via Getty Images)

As the United States faces crises in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, the Biden administration announced liquified natural gas (LNG) export restrictions, which will harm America’s economic and security interests while also raising global emissions.

In The Hill, Hudson Senior Fellows Thomas J. Duesterberg and Brigham McCown explain how. Read their key points below.

Key Insights

1. An all-of-the-above approach to energy would contribute to economic growth and geopolitical stability for America and its allies.

American LNG exports have been key to keeping European economies stable, helping Ukraine resist Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression, and maintaining stable energy prices in the Pacific Rim. Indeed, last year the United States became the world’s largest LNG exporter, surpassing Qatar and Australia. After the shock of the 1972 Arab Oil Embargo, America spent decades eliminating its dependence on foreign energy suppliers to become the world’s leading energy producer. Energy independence, ample supplies, and lower prices have also been the secret to reenergizing US industrial capacity.

2. To reduce global emissions, the US should export more LNG.

Despite increasing production, the United States has seen one of the most significant decreases in carbon emissions of any industrialized country, now 17 percent below 2005 levels and falling while the economy continues to grow. The Biden administration’s theory is that exporting natural gas perpetuates the use of hydrocarbons: if America did not export such energy, other countries would emit less. But without American LNG, other countries’ emissions would actually increase because they would be forced to utilize fuels like coal or fuel oil that have higher carbon content.

3. LNG export restrictions will create distortions in the US market and slow America’s energy transition.

Export restrictions will distort US markets and cause natural gas prices to fall at home. Such a move would likely mean the US economy sees less electrification—for example, fewer heat pumps and renewables may be installed. If America’s long-term goal is decarbonization, the government should be agnostic about how that goal is achieved. The glide path toward net-zero emissions requires a realistic assessment of the business case for achieving the desired outcome. To understand why, one need only look at the disastrous path of the German economy since it chose to accelerate the energy transition before alternatives to fossil fuels could become a reliable and cost-effective alternative. Instead of repeating this mistake, the markets should be allowed to find the answers to this challenge.

Quotes may be edited for clarity and length. 

Go Deeper