1 day ago

Trump’s LNG Push Is Bad for the Climate, Bad for Communities, and Bad for American Wallets

Author Bio

Nicholas Vincent is a passionate environmentalist and freelance writer. He is deeply committed to promoting... Read More

shutterstock_2606176195-scaled-e1778074815681

At a time when climate consequences are accelerating and everyday families are struggling to keep up with rising utility bills, the current U.S. administration is doubling down on a fossil fuel agenda with serious consequences for people and the planet. This week, U.S. officials announced a series of agreements at an international summit in Croatia aimed at dramatically expanding liquefied natural gas exports from the United States to Central and Eastern Europe, branding the effort “Trump Peace Pipelines.”

The environmental costs of this expansion are staggering. LNG begins its life in fracking wells, then must be chilled to extreme temperatures to become transportable, a process that demands enormous amounts of energy. From there it travels thousands of miles aboard massive tankers. Methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases known to science, bleeds into the atmosphere at nearly every stage. According to Cornell University researcher Robert Howarth, less than a third of LNG’s total greenhouse gas emissions even come from burning the fuel. The rest occur upstream, leading Howarth to conclude that LNG’s overall carbon footprint rivals or surpasses that of coal.

Frontline communities are already paying a steep price. Along the Louisiana coast, new LNG export terminals have brought air Pollution, dredging, and relentless tanker traffic that locals say is destroying fisheries and degrading quality of life. James Hiatt, who founded the grassroots group For a Better Bayou, says the people living near these facilities receive almost none of the financial benefit while bearing all of the burden. The tax incentives offered to developers mean residents are, in effect, subsidizing their own Pollution.

The damage doesn’t stop at the shoreline. Consumer advocacy groups point out that selling U.S. gas reserves on global markets drives up domestic energy costs for working families. And in Europe, analysts warn that swapping a dependency on Russian gas for one on U.S. LNG offers little real security, since shipments can be rerouted to higher bidding markets at any time.

The smarter path forward already exists. Investing in localized renewable energy rather than locking in new fossil fuel infrastructure would give communities, nations, and the planet far more stability and far less harm. The climate math is clear, and so is the human one.

Being publicly-funded gives us a greater chance to continue providing you with high-quality content.Click here to Support Us

Sign These Petitions!

Please sign our latest and most urgent petitions to help the planet. Every signature counts!