Brain-dead political posturing. I doubt that the would-be importers at the other end are going to shiver in the dark. Vs. burning more coal or oil (both higher-carbon), or buying LNG from some less-savory supplier. And they'll get yet another lesson in "never buy American, because they're completely unreliable suppliers".
Vs. if you actually believe the "climate change" narrative and care about the planet's long-term future (vs. scoring points on social media today)...and you also have executive power to allow/block LNG exports - how about you use that power to squeeze the oil & gas industry to stop leaking so d*mned much CH4 into the atmosphere? Or restrict LNG sales to "nice" countries...which also happen to employ thousands of American workers, at good wages, in factories they've built in the USA?
Other side of this is that it also depresses U.S. natural gas prices as demand for feed gas for those plants won't be there. Many people are after that, they claim that exports hurt U.S. consumers too much by making gas more expensive.
And would-be importers are going to use more renewables because that's what will be the cheapest option.
Vs. if you actually believe the "climate change" narrative and care about the planet's long-term future (vs. scoring points on social media today)...and you also have executive power to allow/block LNG exports - how about you use that power to squeeze the oil & gas industry to stop leaking so d*mned much CH4 into the atmosphere? Or restrict LNG sales to "nice" countries...which also happen to employ thousands of American workers, at good wages, in factories they've built in the USA?