The Iran war shows why clean energy is the more secure choice | Zero: The Climate Race
From Zero: The Climate Race
Emily Grubert•Civil Engineer and Environmental Sociologist, University of Notre Dame
Executive Summary
The energy transition is entering a difficult "mid-transition" phase where legacy fossil fuel systems and new clean energy systems coexist, each large enough to constrain the other but too small to provide all necessary services.
This period is inherently more expensive and politically fraught due to the need to pay for and maintain duplicative infrastructure (e.g., new wind farms and legacy gas plants), which can fuel public backlash against climate policies.
Despite the challenges, the analysis argues for accelerating through this phase as quickly as possible, as the end-state of a fully decarbonized system is cheaper, more resilient, and more secure.
Geopolitical factors, such as differing climate ambitions among major emitters (US, China, India vs.
EU) and a new focus on manufacturing self-sufficiency, add significant complexity to navigating the transition.
12 quotes
Concerns Raised
The mid-transition period is inherently expensive and complex, risking political backlash that could slow climate action.
An unmanaged, chaotic decline of fossil fuel infrastructure could lead to supply-demand mismatches and price volatility.
Major emitters like the US, China, and India are showing signs of wavering climate ambition.
Legacy systems assumed to be reliable backups, like natural gas, may prove fragile under the new operational stresses of a renewables-heavy grid.
Opportunities Identified
Accelerating through the mid-transition can lead to a cheaper, more secure, and resilient energy system.
Geopolitical shocks related to fossil fuels can serve as powerful catalysts for countries to speed up their transition to domestic renewable energy.
Proactive planning for the fossil fuel phase-out, as seen in California, can mitigate negative economic consequences and ensure grid stability.