Democracy is only a dream: it should be put in the same category as Arcadia, Santa Claus, and Heaven.
- H. L. Mencken
Germany's chancellor candidates face off in 4-way debate | DW News
...and You Thought We Only Have to Adjust to a New Axis of Evil: The U.S. and Russia!
Dear Mr. Bundeskanzler, What Are Your Climate Plans?
It is undoubtedly sensible to transition away from fossil fuels for the sake of climate protection.
Yet despite countless pledges to pursue an energy transition, the world is nowhere near "de-fossilizing." The approach must change.
The Power of Ideas—and Their Misuse
Ideas and the language we use to articulate them matter. When the Cold War ended, the phrase "the end of history" suggested that the collapse of Soviet communism had cemented liberal democracy and free-market economics as the undisputed global order.
This belief lulled Western policymakers into complacency. Three decades later, the concept of "the end of history" looks like a spectacular failure.
Today, the term "energy transition" captivates political decision-makers in the West. It suggests an inevitable shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy—a seemingly indisputable notion aligned with climate goals and technological progress.
However, it fails to explain how this transition should happen and has led to government actions that are both expensive and counterproductive.
Worse, this vague term has created a false dichotomy, pitting climate action against energy security when they should be complementary goals.
The Net Zero Illusion
To be clear, energy transitions—from one energy source to another—have happened throughout history, driven by economic shifts that created demand for new energy sources.
The Industrial Revolution propelled societies from wood to coal, then to oil and gas, thanks to the steam engine, internal combustion, and the rise of manufacturing industries.
The drive to abandon fossil fuels stems from real concerns about climate change and the costs it imposes. Global warming is linked to carbon dioxide and methane emissions from burning coal, oil, and gas. The ultimate goal—net-zero emissions (ideally by...A.S.A.P.)—requires replacing fossil fuels with renewable sources such as solar, wind, and nuclear energy.
Fossil Fuels: The Uncomfortable Reality
Yet, the world is not progressing in that direction. There is no true "de-fossilization." Fossil fuels—oil, gas, and coal—still supply over 80% of global energy.
Since 2013, global oil and gas consumption has risen by 14%, primarily due to a 25% surge in developing countries. Coal remains essential for China, India, and other nations, reaching a record high in 2023.
While renewables are growing rapidly, they are not displacing hydrocarbons—at least not yet.
The reason is simple: Global energy demand is increasing by 2-3% annually, while technological advances like fracking have made hydrocarbons cheaper and more accessible.
The U.S.—already the world's largest oil producer—will likely expand its production under Donald Trump. Meanwhile, economic and population growth in the Global South will sustain a robust demand for energy.
Moreover, emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, electric transportation, Air-conditioning, and hyperscale data centers drive energy demand to levels that renewables alone cannot reliably meet, reinforcing the role of fossil fuels.
Energy-intensive industries such as aviation, shipping, and heavy manufacturing continue to depend on fossil fuels. While renewables excel at electricity generation, they struggle to supply the needs of these critical sectors.
Regulatory and political obstacles have further hindered the energy transition, slowing down approvals for nuclear and wind energy projects.
Governments have also failed to reform tax systems to effectively incentivize a shift away from fossil fuels.
Given that these barriers are unlikely to disappear anytime soon, we face a choice:
Either ignore the problem and continue business as usual (as many participants at annual UN climate conferences prefer), or acknowledge that a fundamental paradigm shift is needed.
A New Paradigm: Energy Coexistence
As Thomas Kuhn argued in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," dominant intellectual frameworks persist until their flaws become undeniable, paving the way for new paradigms. The concept of "energy transition" has reached that point. The fact that the term did not appear in the final document of the 2024 UN Climate Conference in Baku is telling.
We need a new framework: energy coexistence.
This new paradigm acknowledges that global energy consumption will continue to rise, and both fossil fuels and renewables will play an expanded role.
The debate is not an "either-or" but a "both-and"—seeking more security, greater resilience, and better affordability.
Energy coexistence demands targeted investments and political reforms. Modernizing energy grids to integrate diverse energy sources and enhance efficiency is crucial.
Expanding carbon capture and storage technology is essential to reducing emissions.
Encouraging the development of renewables through public-private partnerships and easing regulatory barriers would accelerate progress.
Prioritizing the transition from coal—the biggest emissions culprit—to lower-emission natural gas and renewables should be a top priority.
Some may argue that energy coexistence is a betrayal of urgent climate action.
However, addressing climate change should not come at the cost of energy availability or security.
The reality of global politics ensures that it will not. In fact, public support for climate action is more likely to materialize if policies do not appear hostile to all fossil fuels. Reframing the energy transition is a necessary first step.
Mr. Bundeskanzler, What Will It Be?
Germany and the broader EU stand at a crossroads. The reckless pursuit of an overambitious energy transition has already weakened economic performance and energy security.
The EU’s Green Deal, intended to decouple economic growth from resource consumption and make Europe the first carbon-neutral continent by 2050???, has instead slowed growth and left the continent dangerously dependent on Russian gas.
The question remains: Will Europe double down on a failing energy transition narrative, or will it embrace energy coexistence—balancing renewables with pragmatic fossil fuel use, modern infrastructure, and secure supply chains?
Will Germany prioritize ideological purity or practical sustainability?
The future of global energy policy will be shaped by those who recognize reality, not by those who wish it away.
Mr. Bundeskanzler, it is time to choose.
Tip: Start with lowering/subsidizing power costs so purchasing EVs makes sense and they are not just luxury items for the rich. Fight air pollution in every way possible—invest in new filter technology for chimneys, enforce stricter emissions standards for cars and trucks. And for goodness’ sake, introduce a speed limit of 130 km/h on the Autobahn!
Sincerely,
Adaptation-Guide
