Progress is indeed being made in the realm of green energy. Battery capacity for electric vehicles has increased threefold since the 1980s and batteries in general are improving at larger (and smaller) scales. Still, Lithium-ion batteries are far too expensive as a grid-scale solution. New and innovative batteries (such as sodium-ion designs) are being invented that may one day enable renewables to play a far more constructive role in our energy infrastructure. But today is not the day and the post-national, globalist, and neoliberal elites pushing these solutions are doing so dishonestly and to the national detriment.
New technologies are exciting, but that does not make them solutions in and of themselves. Especially when other new technologies are ignored and old, reliable, technologies such as nuclear energy are written off without a proper public debate.
A Global Market:
Currently, energy prices are set by global market trends, and not by national governments or even corporations. Oil, natural gas, and other energy products (including electricity) are traded on market principles which result in price instability even for countries that produce much more energy domestically than they need.
Speculators, foreign powers, and regional conflicts are able to affect the price of oil for the entire world regardless of national geography.
Policy Solutions:
There are a raft of changes that could, and must, be made to create a larger degree of energy independence for Western countries. This would also result in lower energy prices in many countries and could see other new and innovative technologies deployed to keep our climate clean which fall outside of the traditional climate change narratives currently being championed.
Nuclear Power:
Richard Nixon envisioned the creation of more than 1,000 nuclear power plants in the United States by the year 2000. This goal, titled Project Independence, would have resulted in the United States producing 200% of its electricity needs as of 2024 and would have effectively “de-carbonized” the US grid.
Nuclear power remains a desirable and viable source of cheap electrical power which could and should serve as the backbone of any nation’s national grid. The United Kingdom was the first country to deploy commercial nuclear power at Calder Hall and this legacy should be expanded upon rather than destroyed.
- subsidies for the construction of wind and solar plants should be wound down and redirected to nuclear power plants
- the regulatory environment must be simplified so that plants can be constructed rapidly
- spent fuel must be redeployed to other generation sources to continue generating power for decades to come
A ‘Nation First’ Policy:
Selling excess oil, gas, electricity, and other products is intelligent. Nations can use export-derived income to build wealth and provide more services for their populations, but this must be done intelligently.
Some countries simply subsidize the price of imported oil at the pump, such as Kazakhstan. But when these subsidies stop instability inevitably follows. Rather than choosing between the dangers of a fully global market and the expense of subsidies nations must pick a middle ground.
Israel, for example, has differing contract forms for its domestic and international markets. Domestic consumption is secured through long-term contracts between the oil companies and the Israeli government which keep energy prices much, much, lower than the current global trends. While its exports to other countries are still linked to the global market.
As a result, Israel saw only a 2.8% increase in the cost of energy during the post-2020 energy crisis. The Netherlands saw household energy prices jump by over 900% and in Latvia prices increased by 139%, to name but two examples.
Nationalist policymakers should champion a transition to long-term contracts as the domestic norm. Oil and gas produced within the nation must be sold to the nation first and at a stable price point.
New Technologies:
Still, countries are going to want to transition away from finite resources, redeploy them in different ways, and in some cases satisfy the “climate lobby”. To do this new technologies will need to be deployed which can satisfy the majority of people and increase national self-reliance.
The United Kingdom, and its aforementioned coal reserves, are one such example. Britani could return to producing much of its energy from coal by building new plants that utilize carbon capture technology. A pilot project in the United States, Petra Nova CCS, saw over 90% of the carbon dioxide released from a newly constructed coal plant captured and prevented from being released into the atmosphere. The same technologies can be deployed on natural gas power plants
This carbon, using other new technologies, can be turned into a powdery solid or a liquid, and can then be used for other purposes ranging from building materials to batteries and even into types of fuel.
And, of course, there is still a place for renewables as they mature. A community in Canada was able to achieve 100% of its space heating needs through the use of solar technologies and underground storage. Electric vehicles continue to get better as well. According to the International Energy Administration, the average EV’s range has increased from just 80 miles in 2010 to 220 miles today, serving a distinct market segment in the process. EVs will continue to improve and be preferred by a segment of the population, but this does not mean that the current push and subsidy programs are desirable.
Conclusion:
Technology is progressing and globalism has stood in the way of deploying these technologies in a sensible form. The national interest has been decidedly put on the back burner in favor of global market trends and fanciful ideas about the applicability of new technologies that are not yet mature.
A healthy mix of traditional industry, new tech, and innovation all wrapped up in a cohesive nationalist vision for the future of the West is necessary in order to create the kind of progress, stability, and reliability that Americans so desire.