So the valid observation is this: Countries started using green energy as a supplement and replacement to fossil fuels, and as fossil fuels are being phased out for any number of good reasons, those counties also started moving away from fossil fuel collection and stockpiling. But because they weren’t yet entirely free of the need for fossil fuels yet, cutting off those fuels left them with an energy deficit.
The bad take: The move towards green energy made the western world vulnerable to an energy crisis, so we should go back to funding the fossil fuels industry as soon as possible.
The correct take: The continued reliance on fossil fuels made the western world vulnerable to an energy crisis, so we should rid ourselves of that reliance as soon as possible.
A country that runs entirely on non-fossil fuel energy, on solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, even nuclear, doesn’t have to worry if the flow of oil is open or not. Ever. Your infrastructure would have to be attacked directly (like the war crime Trump threatened) to cut you off at that point. That’s about as invulnerable as you could hope for.
A country that runs entirely on non-fossil fuel energy, on solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, even nuclear, doesn’t have to worry if the flow of oil is open or not.
less reliance on fuel imports always improves independence. Incumbent power plants available as backup/option improves resilience and independence as well. It doesn’t need to be all or nothing, and renewables don’t stop new oil projects for exports. Carbon accounting (tax) is entirely attributed to consumers of energy/product+delivery.
The true failure of the golden democracies is their totalitarian subservience to US warmongering enemy propaganda. US empire/CIA serves US champions for extortionist power, and even their dabbling in green policy was was a corporate supremacist model for minnows, that got shot down by incumbent oligarchy. It is colonial subjugation that is 100% responsible for energy vulnerability, because it embraces one’s own extortion. Russian sanctions and self terrorism on Nordstream as prior examples.
China will be fossil fuel free by 2060. And believe me, the Chinese will stick to their 5, 15 and 25 year plan. Actually they already exceeded their target for 2030, last year 2025.
So the valid observation is this: Countries started using green energy as a supplement and replacement to fossil fuels, and as fossil fuels are being phased out for any number of good reasons, those counties also started moving away from fossil fuel collection and stockpiling. But because they weren’t yet entirely free of the need for fossil fuels yet, cutting off those fuels left them with an energy deficit.
The bad take: The move towards green energy made the western world vulnerable to an energy crisis, so we should go back to funding the fossil fuels industry as soon as possible.
The correct take: The continued reliance on fossil fuels made the western world vulnerable to an energy crisis, so we should rid ourselves of that reliance as soon as possible.
A country that runs entirely on non-fossil fuel energy, on solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, even nuclear, doesn’t have to worry if the flow of oil is open or not. Ever. Your infrastructure would have to be attacked directly (like the war crime Trump threatened) to cut you off at that point. That’s about as invulnerable as you could hope for.
less reliance on fuel imports always improves independence. Incumbent power plants available as backup/option improves resilience and independence as well. It doesn’t need to be all or nothing, and renewables don’t stop new oil projects for exports. Carbon accounting (tax) is entirely attributed to consumers of energy/product+delivery.
The true failure of the golden democracies is their totalitarian subservience to US warmongering enemy propaganda. US empire/CIA serves US champions for extortionist power, and even their dabbling in green policy was was a corporate supremacist model for minnows, that got shot down by incumbent oligarchy. It is colonial subjugation that is 100% responsible for energy vulnerability, because it embraces one’s own extortion. Russian sanctions and self terrorism on Nordstream as prior examples.
China will be fossil fuel free by 2060. And believe me, the Chinese will stick to their 5, 15 and 25 year plan. Actually they already exceeded their target for 2030, last year 2025.
For more information see:
https://hive.blog/hive-167922/@cryptoandcoffee/china-invested-1-trillion-on-renewable-energy-last-year-dqc
That’s not true either. One or two countries moved away from collection (because it was uncompetitive already), none moved away from stockpiling.
And as a country replaces some of the fuel, the previous collection and stockpile, without a change makes for a larger safety net.