By Will Pease

In the first official State of the Union since his inauguration, Joe Biden laid out a wide range of overlapping domestic and international crises that have created “Our moment of responsibility”, and “our test of resolve and conscience, of history itself.” The dramatic speech built on themes of challenges to the international status quo outlined in Biden’s first address to congress last April, such as preparing for geopolitical competition with Russia and China, revitalizing the American economy, and combating climate change.

Recent crises have compounded since Biden’s first speech a year ago, with supply chain issues exacerbating inflation and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine causing spikes in energy prices. However, with crisis comes opportunity, and decisive action from world leaders may turn global uncertainty into clarity on renewable energy as an issue of national security. While political roadblocks challenge a transformative agenda, recent developments in the geopolitical arena provide opportunities for the U.S. and its allies to take decisive action on the future of energy and global security.

While Putin’s decision to launch a full-scale war in Eastern Europe has wreaked the most havoc inside Ukraine, the conflict has had global consequences. The escalating war between two of the world’s leading exporters of wheat and gas have caused food and energy prices to sky-rocket. The Russian economy has also taken a massive hit due to international backlash against its aggression. The U.S. and its allies have sanctioned many Russian economic activities, including finance, weapons, and energy, the backbone of the Russian economy. While the U.S. swiftly banned Russian fuel imports, E.U. nations have not followed suit because their economies run on Russian energy.

European reliance on Russian fuel undermines efforts toward an independent foreign policy to hold Russia accountable for its recent escalation. Since Vladimir Putin came to power, fuel exports have funded four trillion dollars to Russia’s war machine, with roughly half of it coming from E.U. countries. In an environment of high inflation and energy prices, European governments cannot cut ties with their largest energy supplier. Many European leaders failed to curb their reliance on Russian energy over the last decade despite Russia’s increasing aggression against its smaller neighbors. During Angela Merkel’s sixteen-year incumbency as the chancellor of Germany, she made few preparations for an increasingly revisionist Russia. Merkel spent years pursuing and defending Nord Stream II, a recently canceled pipeline that would have expanded German imports of Russian gas. Merkel’s government also began shutting down Germany’s last nuclear power plants, a decision that Germany’s new chancellor, Olaf Scholz, has not reversed, cementing Germany’s reliance on Russia for its energy needs in the short term. While nuclear energy will not be part of Germany’s future, the Scholz government recently announced plans to triple the speed of emissions reduction, hoping to reach 80% of energy consumption coming from renewable sources by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2035. Germany is one of many EU countries that Russia’s invasion has awakened to the reality that energy independence is a pre-requisite to an autonomous foreign policy.

Unlike Western Europe, the United States does not rely on Russia for its energy needs. Still, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has had domestic ramifications in the U.S. via the shock to oil prices. Rising gas prices threaten the current administration due to high inflation during the U.S.’s otherwise impressive recovery from the COVID-19 recession. Despite reaching out to allies and adversaries alike, the Biden administration failed to get the world’s leading oil producers to boost output to lower prices and compete with Russian fuel. Biden’s reliance on foreign countries for U.S. energy needs during a time of global uncertainty is a result of past administrations’ complacency towards the future of American energy sustainability. While the White House has laid out plans to increase domestic oil production to counteract rising prices, more must be done to prepare the U.S. for future energy crises. Breaking free of the influence that foreign oil considerations play in American politics would provide flexibility to U.S. administrations in moments of crisis. Some conservatives champion investing in domestic oil and gas production to achieve energy independence, but this is ultimately a stopgap solution that will only exacerbate the climate crisis. Rather than increase investment in energy sources that are finite and destabilizing, the recent energy crisis would best be invoked to highlight the need for immediate investments in green energy sources to create American energy independence for the indefinite future.

Biden will find little support for a transformational green energy agenda among Republicans, and in the Senate, members of his own party pose obstacles to revolutionizing the American energy grid. Joe Manchin has been an unreliable supporter of the Biden agenda and his deep ties to the fossil fuel industry will make him a stalwart opponent to any attempt to decrease American reliance on coal, oil, and gas. However, the executive branch is not solely reliant on the legislature for energy policymaking. Recent reporting by The Intercept revealed that the Biden administration is drafting an executive order invoking the Defense Production Act to ramp up the production of batteries for clean energy storage. The draft acknowledges that “ensuring robust, resilient, and sustainable domestic industrial base to meet the requirements of the clean energy economy is essential to our national security.” If enacted, this executive order would represent an impressive step toward green energy being prioritized as a matter of national security and independence. Although unilateral executive action remains politically controversial, there is an undeniable mandate for decisive action on the future of American energy. If Congress refuses to act, Biden may take matters into his own hands.

While the Russian invasion of Ukraine provides the impetus for big ideas about American energy security, the looming threat of climate change must be centered in any decision regarding the future of energy and global security. The consequences of the Russian invasion of Ukraine may provide a mandate for dramatic action to be taken to shore-up American energy reserves, but to do so without a focus on the effects of climate change would endanger American national security in the long-run. Anthropogenic climate change is making the world a less stable and safe environment for humans across the world and will exacerbate conflict and scarcity if not acted on. At this pivotal moment, the overlapping global crises have aligned to construct a mandate for a concerted effort to center energy reliability and sustainability in the world’s economies.