Select Page

Germany Bows to Trump Criticism – to Build Terminal for U.S. Natural Gas

Germany Bows to Trump Criticism – to Build Terminal for U.S. Natural Gas

Another foreign policy victory for President Donald Trump was won this week when it was announced that the German government would be investing in the construction of a shipping terminal that would hold natural gas from the U.S.

Germany primarily gets its gas from Russia. 50 percent of Germany’s gas imports are from Russia.

“Over breakfast this month, the chancellor told a small group of lawmakers her government had decided to co-finance the construction of a €500 million ($576 million) liquefied natural gas shipping terminal in northern Germany, according to people familiar with the meeting,” writes the Wall Street Journal.

The construction project to build the LNG terminal has been on hold for a year since there was no support from the German government. But now, the project has been revived.

This is all going according to Trump’s plan.

“Mr. Trump has intensively lobbied Europe to buy significant amounts of LNG as part of his campaign to rewrite the terms of trade relations. German and U.S. officials said Berlin hoped embracing U.S. gas might help solve a protracted trade dispute and possibly even defuse threats by Washington to sanction Nord Stream 2, an unbuilt German-Russian gas pipeline that would double Russia’s existing gas export capacity to Germany,” write the WSJ. 

“We’re creating jobs and we’re also deepening the trans-Atlantic relationship. The U.S. is totally committed to bringing U.S. LNG to Europe and to Germany,” said Richard A. Grenell, U.S. Ambassador who has been leading up the lobbying efforts.

Trump has repeatedly criticized Germany for relying so heavily on Russia for its energy supply.

“U.S. LNG is mostly mined from underground rock formations, turned into liquid and shipped in 300-meter-long tankers. It requires special terminals for unloading, storing and converting it back into gas. The complex process means it remains around 20% more expensive than Russian gas, which is delivered straight to Germany mainly via the Nord Stream pipeline,” writes the WSJ.

“LNG is a personal priority for the president and a policy priority for the government,” said Dan R. Brouillette, U.S. Deputy Energy Secretary.

On Monday, Trump said the German LNG project is “good news for Texas,” which is the state that produces the most natural gas in the country, and that Germany “will now purchase massive amounts of LNG, which is great news for your state.”

Russia will evidently be unhappy with the news.

Trump also said this week that the U.S. was pulling out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty after accusing Russia of violating the missile system ban.

“The Russians have been violating INF for years, making this deal unsustainable. We need durable arms control agreements,” said Edward R. Royce, California Republican and House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman.

Author’s note: This is mainly because of Trump’s influence. Germany relies too much already on Russia for energy. Another German-Russian gas pipeline would have given Russia huge leverage over Germany.

About The Author


  1. Robert Pescatore

    It’s about time Germany is paying to help with their defense budget and also good for Trump to be getting his agenda through. It will only happen when Trump and the Republicans call the Demorats liars from the party of lies simply because all the Demorats do is lie and tell lie after lie and cover them up with another lie.

  2. Jeffrey Grant

    Although I agree with the President in facilitating energy security for Germany, Germany caused this problem for themselves by converting its generation to solar PV and wind. These are intermittent sources that required fossil fuel for backup and grid stability. Had they kept their coal and nuke plants this problem would not have arisn or not have been as pronounced.

    The other side of this effect is increased demand on USA production. Increased demand causes increased prices that end up as a “stealth tax” on Americans. Everything that consumes natural gas eg electricity, fertilizer, plastics, etc will cost more.

    The calculation of suppressed USA economic vitality from higher energy costs vs European energy security/stability must have been assessed.

  3. paul baumgartner

    First and foremost we need to stop using coal for our energy needs!! Period! If it cost us a little more so be it. Jobs will not be lost, it will equal out. We need to greatly reduce our need for oil and use plant fibers instead, [hemp] for example. I am 100% Trump supporter, I love him as our president, but we can disagree on this subject.If there are coal plants still being used, use American hard coal, less polluting than soft
    coal, but strive to replace with natural gas, wind, and solar plants.

    • Dennis K Yavorsky

      Coal remains the most thermodynamically efficient fuel for conversion to electricity. In that regard the power industry runs on steam at very high pressure and temperature with heat recovery (economizer) on the input and multi-stage turbines driving the generators. Consider carbon dioxide as a nutrient for plant life that ever-so-slight increases (0.1%) insures more abundant food supplies. The change from lows of the Little Ice Age is tiny and negligible compared to the major greenhouse gas water vapor (3%+ in the tropics and vastly more solar energy absorptive than CO2). Greenhouse operations often elevate carbon dioxide to increase yields and for more robust, healthier plants. Perhaps Germany and the rest of the civilized world might locate coal plants closer to the mines where more open land is available for nurturing the greenhouse operations for year-round, high value crops enhanced by both the flue gas carbon dioxide and energy recovery from the low-pressure power plant steam. It would be a wonderful. better world to dream of that makes a whole lot more sense than the hoax of anthropomorphic global warming.