I think you're missing the point. It's less a question of "can you find an alternative that is at least 80% as efficient", and more a question of "is this 20% bump in efficiency worth the liability risk".
Your opinion is 'yes'.
OP's opinion is 'no'.
Both are valid opinions and highly depend on the nature of your business.
But, OP's somewhat un-american sentiment aside (which I believe is mostly what you're reacting to, rather than the general nature of their argument), I agree that erring on the side of caution and minimizing external liabilities should be on the top of the agenda for any company.
And this is aside from the whole "support local infrastructure and don't empower monopolies further" argument.