Burgum is Right: Diesel Export Ban Would “Hurt Americans,” Raise Prices

In recent weeks, some lawmakers have proposed the idea of a diesel export ban, with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) calling for a full embargo. Affordability is a worthy cause that can be achieved through a number of free market reforms. A diesel export ban, however, would make the problem worse. 

The Trump administration – specifically Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum – has rightly stated that this would not work. At the G20 Energy Ministerial, Burgum explained, “We would consider an export ban if we thought that actually might lower prices, but that’s not the case.” The Secretary further noted that he is “not at all confident” a ban would lower prices and warned it could “actually hurt Americans” in import-dependent regions. 

Lawmakers should follow the Administration’s lead and oppose these efforts.

A diesel export ban would raise prices. U.S. refiners currently produce about 5.3 million barrels of distillate a day against domestic demand of roughly 3.6 million. If exports are banned, refiners can’t just stockpile the surplus indefinitely. Instead, refiners would simply cut production. This would tighten supply, thus raising prices. Because gasoline and diesel are co-produced at the same refineries, cutting diesel output cuts gasoline output too. In this way, a policy sold as “relief” would instead squeeze Americans more at the gas pump.

Further, American refineries aren’t all built for American oil. About 70% of U.S. refining capacity is designed to run on the heavier crude we import, not the lighter crude we pump here. Even if a ban trapped more U.S. oil in the country, much of it would just sit with nowhere useful to go.

Republicans have rejected this effort before. When the Biden administration floated a crude oil export ban in 2022 amid its own gas-price crisis, Republicans adamantly opposed the effort. 

Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Kevin McCarthy, and 91 other House Republicans wrote to President Biden warning that a ban “would destroy American jobs and lead to higher energy prices,” and that the only real beneficiary would be Russia. 

Oversight Republicans, led by Rep. James Comer, warned that an export ban would result in “even higher gas prices, supply chain issues, global market upheaval, and reduced energy security.” Current RSC Chairman August Pfluger saidany export restriction would “discourage U.S. oil and gas production.” 

The economics of this policy hasn’t changed. Senate and House Republicans should remain strong defenders of a free energy market.

Lawmakers should focus on more free market solutions to high energy prices. The actual drivers of today’s diesel spike – war-related disruptions, Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries, and years of domestic refining capacity lost to closures – call for supply-side fixes. 

President Trump is already taking action to move more diesel where it’s needed without resorting to a ban. Trump has kept in place the longest Jones Act waiver in history, freeing up more ships to move fuel between U.S. ports.

As Patrick De Haan, GasBuddy’s head petroleum analyst, explains, “The current broad Jones Act waiver has been in place since March, the longest waiver I believe in history, and it has already done what a ban can’t. Gulf Coast to East Coast shipments hit a record in April, rising above 200,000bpd, with similar spikes to West Coast shipments.”

Instead of calling for ham-fisted export restrictions, lawmakers should endeavor to tackle real impediments to energy production: remove regulatory barriers to new refining investment, streamline the permitting process, and open up more federal land and waters to production. 

While the instinct to help Americans at the pump is a good one, an export ban is the wrong solution. The Trump administration has the right instincts on this policy, as did the entirety of the GOP just a few years ago. Banning diesel exports would raise costs and weaken American energy security. Lawmakers should look past restrictive energy policies and toward policies that expand refining capacity and unleash American energy production.