The War Between European Oil Sources and Global Climate Change
Today, March 18, is the little-known date that marks Global Recycling Day. In the climate minded world I’ve grown up in, recycling is second nature and climate change is a constant concern. Other global concerns, however, have overtaken the news and subverted what I thought would always be a prioritized effort, if not for every individual or nation then at least in the headlines.
Fossil fuels are expensive, and with the sudden and unpredictable layer of a war in a part of the world that cranks out oil, the loudest reaction has been to find new oil sources, and even increase oil rigs across the U.S. It takes longer than we’d hope for the world to roll over to relying on different resources, according to a climate article about energy prices in “How Spiking Energy Prices Complicate the Fight Against Gflobal Warming.” The reality of a long term change toward sustainability makes oil unfortunately important to sustaining economic growth in renewable energy. It’s looking like an economic struggle for fuel is ahead, with a global divide over where to allocate funds. Currently, the answer lies both in investing in expensive renewable energy for the future, and also continuing to pour financial resources into the limited fuel source of oil wells.
As oil becomes a divisive resource, the factor of national energy security has been driving
Speculation on how to stop relying on one source is valuable. “E.U. will unveil a strategy to break free from Russian gas, after decades of dependence” from The Washington Post said less dependence on one nation’s fuel source is more economically and sustainably sound. However, it will be a long and complicated process, and war is typically very detrimental to natural environments. Beyond depleting and fighting over resources, the massive threat of potential nuclear weapons increases the global risks of a war, even as it remains mostly limited to one corner of the world.
Gasoline was $3.84 per gallon last time I checked locally. Evidence and The New York Times point to a focus on the same fuel, as articles like “Climate Fears on Back Burner as Fuel Costs Soar and Russia Crisis Deepens” emphasize a supply chain interruption rather than a forced effort to move toward alternative fuel sources. Regardless, the U.S. energy secretary recently recommended increasing national oil endeavors, according to more about “energy security.” Is natuional security more important than global security? National values vary, and the whole world will never move at the same pace toward protecting the natural environment while competitive markets drive fuel manufacturing.
Phasing out fossil fuels comes with a cost of nuclear or hydrogen energy processes will impact climate change, but the application of oil as power is key to the politics of the issue. Though it grows increasingly urgent, climate security is a goal for decades out. It will take years to make visible change, but dependence on nonrenewable fuel sources is a problem that mirrors political current conflicts. Combining global climate protection efforts with working toward peace could be more effective than the current opposition that lets a war get in the way of what needs to be a constant struggle for global climate health. Hopefully the impending fuel crisis will inspire new urgency toward sustainable solutions.
~ Molly George `23
