Skip to content

Why the European Union also needs to be Energy Independent

In the US, we have been talking about our current energy crisis, and our need to become energy independent.  The general population certainly is becoming aware of this need, $4 a gallon gas helps to get people focused on an issue.  Hopefully our political leaders will start to put action behind their rhetoric. However, the US is not the only country that needs to be concerned about energy independence.   With the recent crisis in Georgia, it is clear that this conflict has a large impact on the energy situation in Europe.

As we discussed last week, Russia currently has a stranglehold on the EU’s energy supply.  The Russians now supply about 25 percent of the European Union’s crude oil needs and half of its natural gas.  If the European Union has not figured out the strategic importance of this fact, the Russians obviously have.  Just as OPEC held the West hostage in the 70’s, Russia now has the ability to wield the same control over Europe.  Their first step was invading Georgia and daring NATO to do anything about it.  So far, Europe has once again shown their leadership in the fine art of appeasement.   And the US, which is busy fighting multiple battles, does not have the stomach to get involved. 

There are three basic reasons why the US, EU, and others such as China, India, and Japan need to become energy independent.

1) Stop sending Trillions of dollars to non-democratic countries that are usually unstable dictators, or hostile regimes.  This money transfer is unhealthy to the global economy.  It allows a small group of people in these petro-kingdoms to hold their own people hostage.  Is it any surprise that almost no country who’s main export is oil is a free democracy that values human rights?

2) Our reliance on carbon based energy sources is a contributor to global warming.  In addition, the extraction of oil from areas such as the Middle East, Nigeria, and South America creates huge environmental issues.  These countries do not have strong environmental regulations like we have in the West.

3) New energy technology will drive our economy over the coming decades.  Instead of sending petro-dollars overseas, that money should be invested in our economy, and on new technology that will help make the world a safer and cleaner place to live.

Rate this:
3.4

2 Comments

  1. no imageLaane (Who am I?) wrote:

    Not all of Europe is dependent upon Russian oil.
    And even though there’s a European Union, that doesn’t mean that the independence of the countries is lost.
    That means that Russia won’t have as much control as you suggest.

    Another fact is that we in Europe are further in the development of other sources of energy than America.
    Take for instance windenergy.
    We’re also better in saving energy in the household, and the way we built our houses are more targetted towards saving energy.

    I’m not very worried about Russia taking over the energy market.

    I think the way you’re looking down on the reaction of the NATO is shortsighted.
    America is as much part of it as Europe.
    We here in Europe have a different culture as the one of America. The complicated situation of some former Sovjet Russion countries now belonging to Europe calls for a peacefull solution. Otherwise the poorest people will suffer.
    War isn’t always the solution as many wars have shown.

    Laanes last blog post..Crashing

    Rate this:
    3.2
    Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 8:06 pm | Permalink
  2. no imageProdromus (Who am I?) wrote:

    I think with a hold on 25% of the oil and 50% of the national gas used in Europe, Russia does have a fair amount of control over the EU when it comes to energy supplies. Back in 2006, Russia’s Gazprom briefly cut off gas supplies to Ukraine, bringing Hungary, Austria and Slovakia near shortage levels and forcing the EU to intervene. That is called control.

    I agree with you that the EU has done a much better job than the US in terms of renewable energy and conservation. Those are both areas that the US needs to invest in to become energy independent.

    When I discussed NATO’s reaction, I was including the US. The global community is more willing to appease as opposed to confronting Russia. Confrontation does not just mean War. No one wants war with Russia, but we can impose economic and diplomatic sanctions.

    Rate this:
    3.4
    Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*