Washington, D.C. – The Biden administration recently made a groundbreaking decision by halting the granting of new permits for building liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals. This move, which is seen as a rare act of defiance against big oil, has sparked intense reactions from the petroleum industry and its political allies.
The decision to suspend new permits for natural gas terminals has put the spotlight on the contentious debate surrounding the role of natural gas in the nation’s energy landscape. It has also raised questions about the environmental and economic implications of this decision.
Critics argue that the fracking revolution, which has driven a significant reduction in emissions and reduced reliance on foreign sources of natural gas, has been instrumental in powering the economy. However, environmental advocates point out that while fracked gas produces less emissions than coal when burned for energy, it also leaks methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere during extraction and transportation.
Furthermore, new research has shown that when fracked gas is transported on ships, the amount of methane leakage significantly outweighs the emissions produced by coal. This raises concerns about the environmental impact and long-term sustainability of natural gas as an energy source.
Moreover, proponents of renewable energy argue that with advancements in solar and wind technology, there is no longer a need for an intermediate transition from coal to natural gas. They emphasize that bypassing natural gas and transitioning directly to renewable energy is the most viable and sustainable path forward.
The decision to suspend new permits for natural gas terminals has ignited a fierce debate about the future of the nation’s energy industry and its environmental impact. It has also underscored the need for a comprehensive and sustainable approach to energy production, one that takes into account both economic and environmental considerations.