What do the islands of Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Malta and Japan have in common? They all import liquefied natural gas (LNG) to meet their energy needs.

Why? Because they find natural gas as reliable as oil, but also cleaner and cheaper. Using LNG for power generation in Hawaii makes sense for precisely the same reasons.

The Pacific Rim would provide Hawaii’s LNG and currently, it is a buyer’s market. LNG delivered to Oahu, at today’s price, would be 30 percent cheaper than oil. This differential between oil and LNG can be fixed in a long-term fuel supply contract.

We estimate that the savings for customers from having LNG would be about $5 billion over the 20 year life of the import project. The average residential customer would save about $25 a month, with the average commercial user saving about $300 and the average industrial user saving about $35,000 each month.

How is this possible? Natural gas offers benefits that go beyond savings on the cost of fuel. It can help minimize the cost of upgrading the grid to integrate high levels of renewable energy.

Generation that is flexible — which can be ramped up and down quickly, and which can be turned on an off several times a day — is critical to keeping the lights on as more and more wind and solar generation is added to the grid. Oahu’s generation units are old, inefficient and inflexible, and therefore not well-suited to work with the high levels of renewable energy planned.

New, flexible generation units are needed, and would use about 30 percent less fuel than existing units. However, new units burning liquid fuels must use ultra-low sulfur diesel, which is at least 30 percent more expensive than fuel oil, in order to meet today’s air emissions standards. The savings on fuel efficiency would be canceled out by increased fuel costs. In contrast, new generation plant burning natural gas easily meets current air emissions criteria, and would pay for itself in fuel efficiency savings alone. This is a major benefit of LNG that many aren’t aware of.

Many who are opposed to LNG assume that the gas will come from hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”). In reality, bulk LNG imports would almost certainly not come from North America, given the surplus of LNG in the Pacific Rim. Outside of North America, natural gas is produced conventionally (without fracking).

Burning natural gas produces 30 percent less carbon dioxide than oil, allowing Hawaii to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by about 1 million metric tons in 2025 — a significant contribution toward meeting Hawaii’s Paris Accord goals. It would also decrease Oahu power plant nitrogen oxide emissions by 81 percent and sulfur dioxide emissions by 98 percent.

Many frame the issue as renewables versus natural gas, as if one must choose between the two. In reality, the competition is between fuel oil and natural gas. Let’s not reject LNG based on preconceived notions that it would stop us from going to 100 percent renewables, when in fact it could help us achieve that goal.

We have the chance to save money, upgrade our grid to allow more wind and solar generation, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve local air quality at the same time. Shouldn’t we take it?

James Ellison is managing director of Cimarron Power, an energy project development firm.