The oil and gas industry has been in persistent advocacy for new U.S. export terminals, asserting that they are crucial to meet Europe's energy and security requirements. However, 60 progressive entities stand in opposition to this argument. Their stance is marked by concerns over environmental conservation, climate change, and the renewable energy transition. This brewing contention presents a dichotomy of perspectives on the future of energy resources and policy.
1. The oil and gas industry is pushing for new U.S. export terminals citing Europe's energy and security requirements as the need.
2. 60 progressive entities are opposing this push, expressing concerns over environmental conservation, climate change, and the shift towards renewable energy.
3. Critics argue that these new export terminals will enhance the U.S.'s reliance on fossil fuels instead of promoting sustainable alternatives.
4. These critics also worry about potential environmental and health risks related to increased fracking activity to meet the proposed additional demand.
5. Doubts are raised whether the proposed move is more for vested interest than Europe's energy security, with critics pointing out that Europe is actively investing in renewable energy that could be affected by greater U.S. fossil fuel exports.
According to a 2019 Global Energy Institute report, the U.S. has the capacity to export up to 25.1 billion cubic feet of liquefied natural gas daily.
Organizations and environmentalists challenge this claim, asserting that it supports an economically and ecologically damaging fossil fuel industry. They argue that building new export terminals would only reinforce the United States' reliance on fossil fuels, instead of seeking clean and sustainable alternatives. Additionally, they raise concerns about the potential environmental and health risks associated with elevated fracking activity needed to fulfill the additional demand. Furthermore, they question whether the move is more about vested interest than Europe's energy security. Indeed, critics point out that Europe has been actively investing in renewable energy, a practice that U.S. fossil fuel exports could potentially undercut.