Russia-Ukraine: Short-Term Energy Security Doctrines, Long-Term Climate Damage?

Some countries, like the US or Norway, are lucky enough to fall into both categories. Against this backdrop, the feeling of urgency to access fossil fuel resources is still very much alive in the global political habitus. Thus, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and resulting Western sanctions imposed on Russia - a major energy resource exporter - inevitably raises political concerns about Energy security and the preservation of economies recovering from Covid-19 depression. This awakened sensitivity to energy security is visible in decisions taken by governments worldwide. It does not bode particularly well for the battle against climate change. Rather, it is emphasizing that governments try to stick to what they know best.

China & Coal

China has taken ambitious stances at COP 26 - especially in terms of decreasing reliance on coal. However, the war is disturbing the Chinese official climate narrative. China has been investing in massive energy resource diversification for a long time and is still signing new contracts today (for example, with the US). But, far from phasing out or even phasing down coal-fired power plants, China is now investing in new coal infrastructures. This decision has been confirmed in the "Energy sector plan" of the 14^th Five-Year plan released a few days ago. The Chinese general motto, reinforced by the recent geopolitical turmoil, is now more than ever on energy security. In practice, this means more coal. Indeed, China has significant domestic coal resources, while it imports parts of its oil and around a third of its natural gas consumption. Thus, investing in new, more efficient, coal-fired power plants provides energy security for its heavily industrialized economy. But it also implies that these plants will continue operating for the next few decades. In light of this context, what does this reinforced urgency for energy security mean for China’s overall climate ambition? Nothing definitive, but nothing good either. What we do know, is that the "coal come-back" triggered by the growing concern for energy security endangers the Chinese coal demand peak and the overall Chinese GHG emissions peak "before 2030".

India & cheap Russian Oil

Despite sharing the same energy security concern, India is taking a different approach. The country cannot be self-sufficient in domestic fossil resources and is thus unsettled about Western sanctions against Russia, a major supplier.

Driven by the fear of immediate high energy prices, investment in renewables is the cheapest and safest option available for India’s future energy security and development. Hence, if it persists in this short sighted and opportunistic approach, the second Asian giant will lose in the long run. 

Japan: Nuclear and LNG

Japan is part of the Western alliance with the US and Europe, and is sanctioning Russia. Given Japan’s dependency on Russian oil and gas, it is now facing growing concerns over the future reliability of Russian energy imports. Big Japanese companies like Mitsui have declined to leave Russia, especially for energy security purposes. Political debates on the importance of energy security are not new in the country. However, the current geopolitical crisis is triggering heated discussions on which direction to take. So far, Japan has taken two main approaches. The first one involves negotiating new contracts and diversifying  suppliers as much as possible, especially for natural gas. The second gives a renewed attention to nuclear energy that Japan had removed from its energy mix after the Fukushima Daiichi incident. That being said, the nuclear question has been a compassionate political issue since 2011. However, Japanese public opinion over this issue has recently changed. It implies that the Japanese government has more leeway to accelerate the resumption of its remaining nuclear power plants, even if it is technically challenging. At the same time, it will continue to invest in renewable energy. In this respect, the Japanese energy security discussion might be easier to align with an enhanced climate ambition than other countries. The key difference is that Japan has nuclear capacities that it can resume in the coming years, while most countries do not. 

Europe & American Gas

Europe is the region facing the most significant energy security challenge from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The share of its dependence on Russian energy resources is incomparable. Because of this reliance, and despite the unprecedented sanctions imposed on the Russian economy, the European Union has not been able to agree on an embargo on Russian energy imports. The ambitious plan operated by the European Commission forecasts to exclude Russian gas, but not before 2027. It also plans to remove 2/3 of Russian gas imports by next year. In order to achieve this, the EU’s first response to energy security urgency has been to discuss fossil-fuel diversification, and make joint purchases of fossil-fuels between member states in order to reduce the cost. 

Moreover, building LNG gasification terminals to decrease reliance on Russia also implies unplanned investments in fossil fuel facilities, which would remain on the market for the foreseeable future. The argument for transforming new LNG gasification terminals into future Hydrogen (Ammonia) terminals has yet to be technically proven. Additionally, significant reluctance from countries like Germany to resume their nuclear power plants, which were closed after the Fukushima incident, equally complicates the situation. It also demonstrates that the EU still perceives energy security through a fossil fuel framework in the short term. Thus, even if the European Commission plan involves massive investment in renewables, the unavoidable investments in new fossil fuel facilities do not bode well for climate change. 

Old habits die hard. Ensuring energy security is a genuine political concern for governments around the world. For centuries, this equation between economic preservation/performances and access to fossil-fuel resources has been true to an almost mathematical point. However, it has changed significantly with technological progress, adaptations to previous energy crises, and the beginning of the energy transition. Most developed nations have now succeeded in decoupling economic performances from GHG emissions. As a result, there has been a decreasing security reliance on fossil-fuel access in the geopolitical game. This reality should also change the political habitus that equates energy security with access to fossil resources. Thus, the primary urgency we face in this crisis, beyond the immediate energy needs, is not to invest too many euros in fossil-fuel facilities that will be on the markets for the next decades and become stranded assets. Instead, the answer to enhancing energy independence should be to develop decarbonized energy capacities as fast as possible.

Copyright: GREG BAKER / AFP