Biden’s Energy Policies, Economic and Security Concerns

 

We’re transforming your reading experience by removing all ads and focusing on high-quality, in-depth geopolitical analysis. Enjoy a cleaner, more enjoyable news experience, free from distractions. Help us continue to provide exceptional content by donating today. Your support ensures we remain independent and reader-funded. Visit linktapgo.com/thedumshow to contribute. Thank you for making The DUM News better than ever! – Matt

---

The political landscape in the United States is constantly evolving, with energy policy being a critical and contentious issue. Recently, debates have intensified over the Biden administration’s energy policies, which starkly contrast with those of the previous administration under Donald Trump. From my perspective, the current approach to energy policy raises concerns about economic stability, national security, and the overall direction of America’s future.

One of the most significant energy-related decisions made by the Biden administration was the revocation of the Keystone XL pipeline permit. On January 20, 2021, President Biden signed an executive order canceling the project, which aimed to transport crude oil from Alberta, Canada, to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast. This decision was a sharp reversal from the Trump administration, which had revived the project after it was initially canceled by the Obama administration.

To me, the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline represents a missed opportunity for economic growth and energy independence. The project was expected to create thousands of jobs during its construction phase and contribute to North American energy security by providing a stable supply of crude oil. It seemed like a sensible way to reduce America’s reliance on oil from politically unstable regions, thus bolstering national security. Furthermore, the cancellation of the pipeline felt like a blow to the U.S.-Canada relationship, as Canadian officials had strongly supported the project.

Another contentious issue is the administration’s stance on fossil fuel production. The Biden administration has taken significant steps to limit oil and gas drilling on federal lands, citing environmental concerns and a commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This approach includes a temporary moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands and waters, announced in January 2021, and subsequent regulations aimed at curbing methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations.

I worry that these policies threaten the livelihoods of millions of Americans who depend on the fossil fuel industry for employment. States like Texas, North Dakota, and New Mexico, where oil and gas production is a major economic driver, stand to lose billions in revenue from decreased production. This reduction not only impacts direct jobs in the energy sector but also has a ripple effect on ancillary industries, from equipment manufacturing to local businesses serving energy workers.

Moreover, from a national security perspective, reducing domestic fossil fuel production could increase America’s reliance on foreign oil, particularly from countries with less stringent environmental regulations and questionable human rights records. It seems that energy independence is a cornerstone of national security, and a robust domestic energy sector provides leverage in international relations.

In contrast, the Biden administration has championed a shift towards renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, and electric vehicles. The administration’s infrastructure bill, passed in November 2021, allocated substantial funds for the development of clean energy infrastructure, including electric vehicle charging stations and renewable energy projects. The goal is to transition the U.S. to a cleaner energy future, reduce carbon emissions, and address climate change.

While the push towards renewable energy is a laudable goal, I have concerns about the feasibility and economic implications of a rapid transition. Renewable energy technologies are not yet capable of providing the reliability and scale needed to meet the nation’s energy demands. For instance, wind and solar power are intermittent sources of energy, dependent on weather conditions and time of day. Until effective and economical energy storage solutions are developed, these sources cannot fully replace fossil fuels.

Additionally, the shift towards electric vehicles and renewable energy infrastructure requires significant investment and raw materials, some of which are sourced from countries with questionable labor practices and environmental standards. For example, the production of lithium-ion batteries, essential for electric vehicles, relies heavily on cobalt, often mined under poor working conditions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Transitioning too quickly could create new dependencies on foreign resources and raise ethical concerns.

Another aspect of the energy debate is the impact of policies on energy prices and the cost of living for Americans. Under the Biden administration, there has been a noticeable increase in gasoline prices, which reached a national average of over $3 per gallon in 2021, the highest in several years. While several factors contribute to gasoline prices, including global market dynamics, restricting domestic oil production exacerbates supply issues, leading to higher prices.

Higher energy costs disproportionately affect low-income families, who spend a larger share of their income on energy expenses. A balanced approach to energy policy should consider the economic impact on all Americans and strive to keep energy affordable. I advocate for a diversified energy portfolio that includes fossil fuels, renewables, and nuclear power. This approach ensures that we have reliable and affordable energy while also making strides toward a cleaner future.

While the intentions behind the current energy policies may be rooted in addressing climate change and promoting sustainability, the implications for the economy, national security, and everyday Americans must be carefully considered. It’s crucial to balance environmental goals with practical and economic realities, ensuring that the energy sector remains robust and resilient.