By: Ben Roth, Conservation Research Manager
President Carter and ‘The Great Challenge’
Global crises have a tendency to bring the reality of our dependence on dirty energy to light. This was as true decades ago as it is now. Back in 1977, President Jimmy Carter warned the United States citizenry that an energy crisis was looming. Production of energy at home was steadily decreasing at a staggering rate of about “6 percent a year.” According to President Carter, if things did not change, we would be forced to import double the amount of oil as we previously did. This, in turn, would lead to a national fear of embargoes and severely hamper our ability to act on the international stage, for fear that oil and gas could be used as leverage against us. It was this fear of an energy crisis that led the United States to what many consider to be a burst of domestic energy production, as well as implementing energy conservation practices.
In the late 70s, many people didn’t put out Christmas decorations to conserve energy; they turned down the heat for fear that an energy crisis was looming due to our dependence on foreign oil and gas. As much as we could, the United States came together to deal with “the great challenge,” and we were successful. Mostly. For the first time since 1952, the United States became a net total energy exporter in 2019, meaning we exported more energy than we brought in. Though there are aspects of Carter’s plan we still have to work on, such as really developing “the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century” and “protect[ing] the environment,” we managed to succeed at shoring up our place on the national energy stage and avoided imminent crisis.
So why are we seeing such a drastic upheaval at the gas pump?
The Crisis in Ukraine and Europe’s Reliance on Russian Energy
As stated above, global crises bring the reality of our dependence on dirty energy to light, and there is perhaps no greater global crisis at this moment than the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Russia is an energy giant; that fact cannot be disputed. Last year, Russia exported more fracked gas than any other country in the world, as well as being one of the top global producers of crude oil and coal. In 2021, 74% of Russia’s exported fracked gas and 49% of its exported crude oil went to the European countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OCED), creating for Europe the exact situation that President Carter warned the United States nearly 50 years ago.
With such a heavy reliance on Russia for its energy needs, Europe found itself, at the beginning of this crisis, in a bind: being forced to try and balance its diplomatic agenda with its energy needs. Punishing sanctions on Russia would cause turmoil for energy markets. There was incentive for Europe to not impose sanctions, or for its sanctions to lack the bite the international community felt was necessary. Despite this, however, Europe did join in implementing devastating sanctions, including the cancellation of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline between Germany and Russia. Yet this brought threats from Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, who warned of fracked gas prices doubling for Europeans. And, since the implementation of sanctions, energy prices have increased throughout the world.
This has spawned the creation of a new energy strategy for the European Union in an attempt to sever its dependence on Russian fracked gas earlier than previously intended: REPowerEU. Though there are plenty of provisions in the strategy to shore up gas reserves, there are also pushes in REPowerEU to reduce the EU’s reliance on dirty energy. To cut its dependence on Russian fracked gas, some strategies include “more rooftop solar panels,” and “decarbonizing industry.”
The United States and Green Energy
So, what does this all have to do with the United States, especially considering how the United States has become a net energy exporter? Right now, despite tackling “the great challenge,” Americans are experiencing substantial price increases at the gas pump. The crisis in Ukraine is affecting energy prices in the United States despite our reduced reliance on foreign oil and gas. This has occurred as “the market began adding a risk assessment to the price of oil” when Russia attacked Ukraine. Sanctions banned banks in the United States from interacting with banks in Russia. Ultimately, “because Russia is a major producer on the world stage, volatility there makes oil prices rise globally,” despite all of our best efforts.
President Carter was right that we needed a new strategy when it came to energy; it’s why he created theDepartment of Energy in 1977. He was right that we needed to bolster our energy resources to stand firmly on the global stage; it propped up America’s energy standing. He was also right when he suggested that we needed to begin seriously investing in alternative forms of energy.
No amount of domestic oil and gas production can ever fully shelter the United States from the effects of a volatile international energy marketplace and industry profiteering. Right now, we’re producing more fossil fuel energy than ever before, but people are still hurting when it comes to energy prices. As long as we continue to utilize oil and gas as our primary energy sources, we will be subjected to the whims of a fickle, unpredictable, and greedy fossil fuel industry. The crisis in Ukraine proves now more than ever that solving “the great challenge” was never enough. Instead, we must focus on solving ‘the great green challenge.’
The Great Green Challenge
The crisis in Ukraine has shown that we cannot just sit by and weather the storm; we have to ramp up our efforts with regard to clean energy. Americans are hurting at the gas pump and are in need of some kind of relief. There are those who would say more oil and gas drilling is the answer, but as we saw above, more domestic production did not cushion the United States from this current international crisis. Gas prices hit an average of $4.32 per gallon as of March 14 2022 and will likely continue to rise into the foreseeable future.
Moving the United States to clean energy would reduce energy costs, increase health and wellbeing, and make a dent in climate change, all while creating job opportunities. In terms of saving money, if we implemented President Biden’s proposed clean energy plan, families would save an average of $500 dollars a year on energy costs. The move to clean energy would mean phasing out dangerous and polluting coal plants that shuffle particulates into the air and contribute to changing our climate. As we’ve seen here in Illinois with the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA), moving toward clean energy doesn’t have to mean damaging our economy or hemorrhaging jobs. In fact, quite the opposite.
Another facet of clean energy involves moving away from gas-powered cars and toward electric vehicles and hybrids. Though the upfront cost for these vehicles is higher now than their gas-guzzling counterparts, owners of electric vehicles on average spend 60% less on fuel, a number that will only improve as the price of gas goes up.
More drilling is not the way to solve the energy-related economic woes Americans are facing. As President Biden said, “Loosening environmental regulations or pulling back clean energy investments…will not lower energy prices for families. But transforming our economy to run on electric vehicles powered by clean energy…that will help.”
This is our ‘great green challenge.’ Instead of focusing, as we did during the Carter era, on domestic energy production, we must focus on investing more in green energy to combat prices in the future. Let us look back at the successes of the past and add to them. Though we exist in a global economy, there are steps we can and should take to help protect ourselves from future crises. These steps would help ensure our safety so we can approach these situations without the threat of outside actors influencing our decisions through price gouging or embargoes.
The climate crisis is a serious looming threat that we all face, and we all must do our part to tackle. At the Illinois Environmental Council, we’re constantly working to help move Illinois towards a goal of 100% clean energy sources. While it may be a lofty goal, there are clear and significant benefits to these efforts, and we will move into the future pushing for a cleaner, healthier Illinois and setting an example for the rest of the nation.
With gas prices skyrocketing, the need for increased investment in clean energy has never been greater. To understand the current situation and what needs to happen next, let us take a look at history and how we got here.
President Carter and ‘The Great Challenge’
Global crises have a tendency to bring the reality of our dependence on dirty energy to light. This was as true decades ago as it is now. Back in 1977, President Jimmy Carter warned the United States citizenry that an energy crisis was looming. Production of energy at home was steadily decreasing at a staggering rate of about “6 percent a year.” According to President Carter, if things did not change, we would be forced to import double the amount of oil as we previously did. This, in turn, would lead to a national fear of embargoes and severely hamper our ability to act on the international stage, for fear that oil and gas could be used as leverage against us. It was this fear of an energy crisis that led the United States to what many consider to be a burst of domestic energy production, as well as implementing energy conservation practices.
In the late 70s, many people didn’t put out Christmas decorations to conserve energy; they turned down the heat for fear that an energy crisis was looming due to our dependence on foreign oil and gas. As much as we could, the United States came together to deal with “the great challenge,” and we were successful. Mostly. For the first time since 1952, the United States became a net total energy exporter in 2019, meaning we exported more energy than we brought in. Though there are aspects of Carter’s plan we still have to work on, such as really developing “the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century” and “protect[ing] the environment,” we managed to succeed at shoring up our place on the national energy stage and avoided imminent crisis.
So why are we seeing such a drastic upheaval at the gas pump?
The Crisis in Ukraine and Europe’s Reliance on Russian Energy
As stated above, global crises bring the reality of our dependence on dirty energy to light, and there is perhaps no greater global crisis at this moment than the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Russia is an energy giant; that fact cannot be disputed. Last year, Russia exported more fracked gas than any other country in the world, as well as being one of the top global producers of crude oil and coal. In 2021, 74% of Russia’s exported fracked gas and 49% of its exported crude oil went to the European countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OCED), creating for Europe the exact situation that President Carter warned the United States nearly 50 years ago.
With such a heavy reliance on Russia for its energy needs, Europe found itself, at the beginning of this crisis, in a bind: being forced to try and balance its diplomatic agenda with its energy needs. Punishing sanctions on Russia would cause turmoil for energy markets. There was incentive for Europe to not impose sanctions, or for its sanctions to lack the bite the international community felt was necessary. Despite this, however, Europe did join in implementing devastating sanctions, including the cancellation of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline between Germany and Russia. Yet this brought threats from Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council, who warned of fracked gas prices doubling for Europeans. And, since the implementation of sanctions, energy prices have increased throughout the world.
This has spawned the creation of a new energy strategy for the European Union in an attempt to sever its dependence on Russian fracked gas earlier than previously intended: REPowerEU. Though there are plenty of provisions in the strategy to shore up gas reserves, there are also pushes in REPowerEU to reduce the EU’s reliance on dirty energy. To cut its dependence on Russian fracked gas, some strategies include “more rooftop solar panels,” and “decarbonizing industry.”
The United States and Green Energy
So, what does this all have to do with the United States, especially considering how the United States has become a net energy exporter? Right now, despite tackling “the great challenge,” Americans are experiencing substantial price increases at the gas pump. The crisis in Ukraine is affecting energy prices in the United States despite our reduced reliance on foreign oil and gas. This has occurred as “the market began adding a risk assessment to the price of oil” when Russia attacked Ukraine. Sanctions banned banks in the United States from interacting with banks in Russia. Ultimately, “because Russia is a major producer on the world stage, volatility there makes oil prices rise globally,” despite all of our best efforts.
President Carter was right that we needed a new strategy when it came to energy; it’s why he created theDepartment of Energy in 1977. He was right that we needed to bolster our energy resources to stand firmly on the global stage; it propped up America’s energy standing. He was also right when he suggested that we needed to begin seriously investing in alternative forms of energy.
No amount of domestic oil and gas production can ever fully shelter the United States from the effects of a volatile international energy marketplace and industry profiteering. Right now, we’re producing more fossil fuel energy than ever before, but people are still hurting when it comes to energy prices. As long as we continue to utilize oil and gas as our primary energy sources, we will be subjected to the whims of a fickle, unpredictable, and greedy fossil fuel industry. The crisis in Ukraine proves now more than ever that solving “the great challenge” was never enough. Instead, we must focus on solving ‘the great green challenge.’
The Great Green Challenge
The crisis in Ukraine has shown that we cannot just sit by and weather the storm; we have to ramp up our efforts with regard to clean energy. Americans are hurting at the gas pump and are in need of some kind of relief. There are those who would say more oil and gas drilling is the answer, but as we saw above, more domestic production did not cushion the United States from this current international crisis. Gas prices hit an average of $4.32 per gallon as of March 14 2022 and will likely continue to rise into the foreseeable future.
Moving the United States to clean energy would reduce energy costs, increase health and wellbeing, and make a dent in climate change, all while creating job opportunities. In terms of saving money, if we implemented President Biden’s proposed clean energy plan, families would save an average of $500 dollars a year on energy costs. The move to clean energy would mean phasing out dangerous and polluting coal plants that shuffle particulates into the air and contribute to changing our climate. As we’ve seen here in Illinois with the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA), moving toward clean energy doesn’t have to mean damaging our economy or hemorrhaging jobs. In fact, quite the opposite.
Another facet of clean energy involves moving away from gas-powered cars and toward electric vehicles and hybrids. Though the upfront cost for these vehicles is higher now than their gas-guzzling counterparts, owners of electric vehicles on average spend 60% less on fuel, a number that will only improve as the price of gas goes up.
More drilling is not the way to solve the energy-related economic woes Americans are facing. As President Biden said, “Loosening environmental regulations or pulling back clean energy investments…will not lower energy prices for families. But transforming our economy to run on electric vehicles powered by clean energy…that will help.”
This is our ‘great green challenge.’ Instead of focusing, as we did during the Carter era, on domestic energy production, we must focus on investing more in green energy to combat prices in the future. Let us look back at the successes of the past and add to them. Though we exist in a global economy, there are steps we can and should take to help protect ourselves from future crises. These steps would help ensure our safety so we can approach these situations without the threat of outside actors influencing our decisions through price gouging or embargoes.
The climate crisis is a serious looming threat that we all face, and we all must do our part to tackle. At the Illinois Environmental Council, we’re constantly working to help move Illinois towards a goal of 100% clean energy sources. While it may be a lofty goal, there are clear and significant benefits to these efforts, and we will move into the future pushing for a cleaner, healthier Illinois and setting an example for the rest of the nation.