Skip to main content
  • Sections
  • Search

Center for Strategic & International Studies

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Sign In

   Ranked #1 Think Tank in U.S. by Global Go To Think Tank Index

Topics

  • Climate Change
  • Cybersecurity and Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Governance
    • Intelligence, Surveillance, and Privacy
    • Military Technology
    • Space
    • Technology and Innovation
  • Defense and Security
    • Counterterrorism and Homeland Security
    • Defense Budget
    • Defense Industry, Acquisition, and Innovation
    • Defense Strategy and Capabilities
    • Geopolitics and International Security
    • Long-Term Futures
    • Missile Defense
    • Space
    • Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation
  • Economics
    • Asian Economics
    • Global Economic Governance
    • Trade and International Business
  • Energy and Sustainability
    • Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Impacts
    • Energy and Geopolitics
    • Energy Innovation
    • Energy Markets, Trends, and Outlooks
  • Global Health
    • Family Planning, Maternal and Child Health, and Immunizations
    • Multilateral Institutions
    • Health and Security
    • Infectious Disease
  • Human Rights
    • Civil Society
    • Transitional Justice
    • Human Security
  • International Development
    • Food and Agriculture
    • Governance and Rule of Law
    • Humanitarian Assistance
    • Private Sector Development
    • U.S. Development Policy

Regions

  • Africa
    • North Africa
    • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Americas
    • Caribbean
    • North America
    • South America
  • Arctic
  • Asia
    • Afghanistan
    • Australia, New Zealand & Pacific
    • China
    • India
    • Japan
    • Korea
    • Pakistan
    • Southeast Asia
  • Europe
    • European Union
    • NATO
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Turkey
  • Middle East
    • The Gulf
    • Egypt and the Levant
    • North Africa
  • Russia and Eurasia
    • The South Caucasus
    • Central Asia
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Russia

Sections menu

  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
    • Blogs
    • Books
    • Commentary
    • Congressional Testimony
    • Critical Questions
    • Interactive Reports
    • Journals
    • Newsletter
    • Reports
    • Transcript
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • Web Projects

Main menu

  • About Us
  • Support CSIS
    • Securing Our Future
Blog Post - Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
Share
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Printfriendly.com

Energy and the U.S.-China Phase One Trade Deal—Don’t Believe the Hype... At Least Not All of It

January 17, 2020

This week, the United States and China signed a so-called “phase one” trade deal to stop the escalation of tariffs that has precipitated since the start of the trade war in 2017. Among other things, the deal includes a pledge by the Chinese to purchase an additional $200 billion of goods over the next two years (additional relative to a 2017 baseline), including $50 billion in energy.

Until the trade war, trade in energy between the China and the United States had been expanding. This makes sense given China’s fast-growing energy demand and the United States’ growing exports.  However, before the trade war, U.S. energy exports to China were still quite limited in value, volumes, and as a percentage of energy exports from the United States and imports into China. According to analysis by Clearview Energy Partners, on a value basis, energy exports to China would have to grow ten times from where there are today to meet the stated goal of the agreement. No small feat. ESAI analysis (see below) suggests a hypothetical Chinese push to increase imports could reach $13.1 billion in the first year rather than the $18 billion stipulated in the deal.

Despite what appears to be an unqualified win for the U.S. energy industry, there is reason to be skeptical that the energy purchasing provisions of the trade deal will come to fruition. First, the Chinese have not indicated they would remove tariffs on energy imports. China may use tariff exclusions or some other relief mechanism to offset the cost to the importer (because, yes, in China too, importers bear the cost of tariffs) but so far have not said they would do so. Second, the Chinese have thus far been reluctant to strike long-term purchase arrangements for U.S. liquified natural gas, and it appears the very existence of this trade war may have justified some of their caution about exposure to the U.S. market.

Third, and perhaps the most important caveat underneath the headline of large energy purchases, is that follow-through on phase one of the deal may be slow based on the tenor of negotiations for phase two (which looks to be tough sledding). In the near-term, the Chinese may be incented to make progress toward their purchasing targets in a show of good faith but getting to the full $50 billion target is a long way off on the bumpy trajectory of trade talks.
Written By
Sarah Ladislaw
Senior Vice President; Director and Senior Fellow, Energy Security and Climate Change Program
Media Queries

Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Caleb Diamond
Media Relations Manager and Editorial Associate
Tel: 202.775.3173

Related
Economics, Energy Security and Climate Change Program, Energy and Geopolitics, Energy and Sustainability, Trade and International Business

More from this blog

Blog Post
Are Gas Pipelines Really Impossible to Build?
By Nikos Tsafos
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
July 8, 2020
Blog Post
United States No Longer Reducing Energy-Related Carbon Emissions
By Nikos Tsafos
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
April 3, 2020
Blog Post
Which U.S. States Are Most Exposed to Low Oil Prices?
By Nikos Tsafos
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
March 12, 2020
Blog Post
Who is Prepared for an Oil Price War?
By Nikos Tsafos
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
March 9, 2020
Blog Post
The UAE Nuclear Project Is Nearing Operation, but Will It Usher in a Nuclear Power Boom in the Middle East?
By Jane Nakano
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
February 25, 2020
Blog Post
Emission Peak Could Be as Fickle as the Weather
By Sarah Ladislaw
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
February 14, 2020
Blog Post
The Complex Relationship Between Coal and Gas in Europe
By Nikos Tsafos
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
February 13, 2020
Blog Post
LNG Needs Depth, Not Just Breadth
By Nikos Tsafos
In Energy Headlines Versus Trendlines
January 27, 2020

Related Content

Report
Mystery Math: The U.S.-China Phase-1 Purchase Figures Do Not Add Up
By Scott Kennedy
March 10, 2020
Critical Questions
The U.S.-China Mini Deal (That Never Was?)
By Jack Caporal
October 17, 2019
Commentary
China’s Poor Purchasing Performance: How Should the United States Respond?
By Scott Kennedy
May 8, 2020
Commentary
A Fragile and Costly U.S.-China Trade Peace
By Scott Kennedy
December 13, 2019
Transcript
U.S-China Trade Deal: Phase One
January 22, 2020
Report
U.S.–Southeast Asia Trade Relations in an Age of Disruption
June 27, 2019
Blog Post
Clarity & Ambiguity in the U.S.-China Phase-1 Deal
By Shining Tan
In Trustee China Hand
March 18, 2020
Commentary
Trade May Still Be the Ballast in U.S.-China Relations—At Least for Now
By Claire Reade
August 10, 2020
Footer menu
  • Topics
  • Regions
  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
  • Web Projects
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • About Us
  • Support Us
Contact CSIS
Email CSIS
Tel: 202.887.0200
Fax: 202.775.3199
Visit CSIS Headquarters
1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Media Queries

Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Caleb Diamond
Media Relations Manager and Editorial Associate
Tel: 202.775.3173

Daily Updates

Sign up to receive The Evening, a daily brief on the news, events, and people shaping the world of international affairs.

Subscribe to CSIS Newsletters

Follow CSIS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Instagram

All content © 2020. All rights reserved.

Legal menu
  • Credits
  • Privacy Policy
  • Reprint Permissions