The Energy Issue

Utblick Utblick.

Magazine

ENERGY ENERGY

Utblick Staff Editors-in-Chief Guery Marañón Alarcón Laurin Zils Legally Responsible Publisher Guery Marañón Alarcón Editors Sabrina Freundlieb Emma Heck Sahithi Kanapala Johannes Malmgren Luna Zhao Featured Writers Adriana Abril Ortiz Tilde Bergström Anita Kaksrud Moltas Karlsson Dominique Keizer Axèle Maillard Arricot Natalia Olsson Orio Illustrator and Graphic Designer Selma Sasivarevic @selmasasivarevic Emma Heck

This material is entirely or partly fi nanced by SIDA, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, through ForumCiv. SIDA/ForumCiv do not necessarily share the opinions found in the magazine. The responsibility for the content rests fully on the writer.

For questions regarding our writing, please e-mail the Editors-in-Chief at utblick.got@gmail.com

Cover image by Selma Sasivarevic All vectors used are from freepik.com This is the fi rst issue of Utblick of the academic year 22/23

Editor’s letter

by Guery Marañón Alarcón & Laurin Zils - p 4

(Un)Just Energy Transition - Decarbonization at whose Expense?

by Adriana Abril & Ismael Izquierdo - p 7-9

Powered by Trees - Exploring the sustainability of biomass energy

by Tilde Bergström - p 10- 13

Energy Dilemmas - Energy security, the environment, and indigenous rights

by Anita Kaksrud - p 14-17

Petroleum: a Blessing or a curse?

by Moltas Karlsson - p 18-23

How the energy crisis is unfolding the deep-rooted biases

by Dominique Keizer - p 24-27

The securitization of energy in the light of the energy crisis: a CFSP concern?

by Axèle Maillard Arricot - p 28-31

Merit Order Effect

by Natalia Olsson Orio - p 32-34

Editor's letter You are holding the newest issue of Utblick Magazine in your hands. In this issue, we explore the topic of energy, one of the crucial factors influencing world politics and essential to protecting the environment.

The political issues surrounding energy continue to expand along with the global energy demand. Energy is a subject that cannot be ignored, from the ongoing crisis in Ukraine to the vital necessity of combatting climate change.

We are pleased to provide a selection of articles by seven of our talented and committed staff writers and one guest writer in this issue, each of whom brings something unique to the discussion. We are taken on a historical tour of the use of fossil fuels by Adriana Abril and Ismael Izquierdo, who also emphasize the expenses associated with energy development. By examining the potential of biomass energy, Tilde Bergström looks at whether the world is becoming more environmentally friendly in light of climate change. Anita Tvedt Kaksrud investigates the problems with fracking's impact on human rights, paying particular attention to the experiences of the Mapuche and Sami populations in Argentina and Norway, respectively. Concerning petroleum, Moltas Karlsson looks into the connection between democracy and macroeconomic prosperity. The energy crisis is not hurting everyone equally, as Dominique Keizer reveals, but is instead "unfolding the deep-rooted biases." The success of the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) so far is thoroughly examined by Axèle Maillard Arricot. Last but not least, Natalia Olsson explores the Merit Order Effect and how it relates to the goal of renewable energy.

We want to express our sincere appreciation to our hard-working staff writers and editors for their commitment to our project. Additionally, we would like to acknowledge the contributions and support of the Society of International Affairs in Gothenburg (Utrikespolitiska föreningen I Göteborg). As readers, we hope you will appreciate our work as writers with a passion for international relations. Furthermore, we invite you to consider joining our team in the future.

But for now, take a seat back, unwind, and allow our publication to give you the power to think about the world's energy issues.

Thank you for reading, Guery Marañón Alarcón & Laurin Zils Editors-in-chief, Academic year of 2022-2023 4

Image by Bruno Figueiredo on Unsplash

5

Image by Chris LeBoutillier on Unsplash

6

(Un)Just Energy Transition

Decarbonization at whose Expense?

By Ismael Izquierdo and Adriana Abril The Agenda 2030, the Paris Agreement, and the Net-Zero emissions 2050 stress the relevance of achieving clean and affordable energy for all while reducing carbon emissions. Despite that, hundreds of millions of people in the least-developed countries in the African region still lack access to electricity. In contrast, the energy use per person increases steadily in high-income regions so that an average person in Iceland, Canada, or the United States consumes in one month what an Indian does in two years, 14 months, and one year respectively. Even if those three high-income countries strongly depend on heating due to winter, India needs energy for cooling and air conditioning. This example illustrates the huge inequalities at the foundation of our current energy systems.

A feminist approach to energy systems intends to uncover those asymmetries in the benefits and harms of a just and equal energy transition.

Bell, Dagget, and Labuski, a group of researchers from Virginia Tech in the US, invite us to reflect on how “[...] energy-intensive lifestyles were and are made possible by the underdevelopment of the Global South, and by violence enacted upon marginalized communities and ecosystems”.

Renewables like solar and wind rely heavily on extracting critical minerals from countries of the Global South. Hydroelectric dams can cause human displacement, environmental degradation and negatively affect the livelihoods of local communities. A profit-driven growth can overshadow the geopolitical and systemic inequalities at the foundation of this “green deal.” Besides an issue of technology and financial investment, the path towards just energy systems requires questioning what is at the center of the discussion: is it people and biodiversity or profit and unsustainable economic growth?

Warming up for the discussion: energy in a nutshell What is energy? It is the capacity to do some work, e.g., heating your tea, cooling your house or apartment, charging your phone, or, simpler than that, just dancing. We learn that “energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted from one form of energy to another”: the law of conservation of energy. But what is the trick with this law? Well, it is hidden in the energy source because some are more efficient in transforming from one form of energy to another.

Therefore, depending on the context, i.e., geography, weather, and resource availability, some sources and their respective harness technology can be preferred over others. It is clear that it is impossible to build hydroelectric projects everywhere, cover the world with solar panels and wind turbines, or depend totally on fossil fuels.

7

Image by Chris LeBoutillier on Unsplash

Besides, to plan and deploy energy projects in conflict zones or natural diverse areas, proper consultation with indigenous peoples and local communities play a fundamental role.

The case of the French company Électricité de France (EDF) shows the legal battles behind installing an industrial-scale wind farm project in the southern Mexican state of Oaxaca, where there has been an escalation of conflicts and the criminalization of human rights defenders advocating for the right to a free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples.

Beyond being only a question of the right technology, evaluating energy projects' social and environmental consequences requires politicizing the energy conservation law.

What about energy history?: a history of (eco) modernization Before the Industrial Revolution, wood and dried manure were the energy sources to heat homes and cook food. Once the shortage of firewood and charcoal was evident, the first energy transition occurred, coal. It was adopted rapidly for heating and cooking and in steam engines representing a milestone for the industrial revolution (~1850). Half a century later, a new transition occurred, oil. Similarly, natural gas entered the game with applications at the household level. In this fashion, gas and electricity pushed coal out of the home heating market, and oil flourished as the primary energy source for transportation. In the 1960s, nuclear energy entered the stage as part of the energy mix. Two decades later, the most recent transition occurred in the arena of renewables, being hydropower, solar, and wind energies as the most famous. These have caught global at-

8

tention due to the ambitious goals for decarbonizing energy and net-zero emissions by 2050.

Today, the energy mix is dominated 84% by fossil fuels, i.e., oil, coal, and gas, the large drivers of climate change and air pollution.

They cause three-quarters of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. The other 16% of the energy mix are low-carbon sources, divided into 4% nuclear energy and 11% in, among others, hydropower, wind, and solar. However, the increase in low-carbon sources still needs to be competitive with the vast percentage of fossil fuels. Also, considering that in the 90s, the energy mix already counted with 13.5% low-carbon sources, and almost three decades later, these sources have increased by less than 2.5%. The shift to low-carbon energy alternatives appears to be slower than expected.

Before continuing, history was not apolitical but attached to a social and geographical context. According to the mainstream discourse, fossil fuels, first coal, then oil and natural gas, allowed economic growth and modernization in Europe. This uncovered the colonial past and the unequal exchange in global value chains. Now the discourse focuses on decreasing energy consumption or using “new forms of energy” in western Europe to decarbonize the economy. On the other hand, the position of the African Union regarding energy transition is clear in the sense that natural gas and nuclear energy, among others, will play a key role in bringing modernization, while renewables only in the long term are an option for a climate-resilient future. It seems that modernization and economic growth are at the core of the discussions.

Is there a future away from fossil fuels?

The history of energy demonstrates that “not always” modernization implies economic growth and prosperity for all.

A just energy transition requires time, resources, and communal democratic energy systems. Switching to renewables requires access to natural resources (sometimes scarce elements), infrastructure for delivery and storage, and sound end-of-life treatments (e.g., reuse, recycle). From a climate change and efficiency perspective, the transition to renewables is worth it. Burning fossil fuels are the major cause of air pollution and climate change, and at the same time, when combusted, between 60 to 67% of the energy is lost as heat.

On the other hand, we cannot be blind to the challenges. Renewables such as solar and wind depend highly on metals, which is why they are often called “mineral-intensive clean energies.” Most of these metals are exploited in specific areas of the world. For instance, copper, nickel, cobalt, rare earth elements, and lithium, are mainly obtained from Chile, Indonesia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), China, and Australia, respectively. But, then, most of them are processed in China.

Unfortunately, mining these metals entail social and environmental issues: the initiative Transition Minerals Tracker has identified 495 allegations of human rights abuse from 2010 to 2021, mainly attacks against human rights defenders, indigenous peoples, and water pollution.

For instance, cobalt extraction in the DRC has been related to corruption, environmental pollution, child labor, and financing of armed groups.

Hydrological power is also contested in many geographies, from Honduras, where the indigenous Lenca people risk their lives to defend their intrinsic link with their territories (see the case of Bertha Cáceres, murdered at her home for her leadership role in the community), to massive dams in Cambodia, part of the Chinese government’s “Belt and Road Initiative” for investment in building infrastructure, where thousands of people have been displaced without access to proper consultation and reparation. Now more than ever, it is essential to keep in mind: decarbonization at whose expense?♦

Image by Rochak Shukla on Freepik

9

Powered by Trees Exploring the sustainability of biomass energy

By Tilde Bergström The latest report from IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, declares renewable energy as one of the most important measurements in order to tackle global warming. One of those renewable sources is energy produced by biomass. The benefit of biomass energy is however a contested topic in the scientific world. While some deem it essential in the fight against climate change, others warn that the burning of biomass might do more harm than good.

Biomass energy is the oldest form of energy used by humans, ever since our ancestors were burning wood to cook food and keep warm. Today biopower accounts for about three-quarters of the world's renewable energy according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Biomass is an organic material, and its use for energy can be broadly divided into two main categories.

One is organics grown with the purpose of transforming them into energy.

10

The other is residues from organic material, which can entail farm waste, municipal waste, and woody residues from the forest industry.

There are then numerous different ways to convert biomass, or feedstocks as they are called, into heat and electricity. Biopower is not to be confused with biofuels, which are ethanol and diesel made from plants such as sugarcane and corn.

A statistical report published in 2020 by the World Bioenergy Association (WBA) shows that wood is the most common biomass feedstock for producing heat and electricity. The energy is most often generated by burning it in large industrial power plants. It can also be co-fired together with fossil fuels in order to reduce climate impact. Since wood has a fairly low density and contains moisture, it is getting increasingly popular to convert wood into pellets before burning. Wood pellets are small cylinders made from compacted sawdust. The WBA states wood pellets as one of the fastest-growing sectors within the bioenergy industry, with an annual growth rate of more than 11% since 2013.

The making of a renewable energy sourc

Enviva announced plans to double their production by 2026, building six new pellet mills and increasing the yearly output from 6,2 million tons to 13 million tons.

The status of biomass as a clean and renewable energy source could be traced back to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement led by the United Nations to target greenhouse gas Sustainable… or? emissions and climate change. In the protocol If biomass energy biomass burning is Deforestation is responsible is an alternative to equivalent to sofossil fuels that even lar and wind power for about 11% of our carhelps offset carbon, in terms of carbon bon emissions according to then why are some emissions. This is scientists raising UNEP. based on the asconcerns? Forests sumption that any CO2 emissions released by burning biomass are vital ecosystems for our planet's health. will be absorbed again as trees are replant- The United Nations Environment Programme ed. This view on biomass energy was then (UNEP) explains that forests have the capacity adopted by the EU, legislating biomass as a to remove carbon from the atmosphere, storcarbon-neutral energy source in the 2009 Re- ing it in wood, plants, and soil. When trees get newable Energy Directive. The directive also logged, that carbon is then released again, inbound member states to have 20% of their creasing our climate impact. Deforestation is energy from renewable sources by 2020. This responsible for about 11% of our carbon emissparked a boom in the demand for woody bio- sions according to UNEP. Furthermore, forests mass, and according to the European Commis- are very important for biodiversity as well as sion biomass was responsible for 60% of the providing clean water and preventing erosion.

EU’s renewable energy in 2019.

In order to fulfill renewable energy quotas, the biomass industry has been heavily subsidized.

The largest biomass power plant in the world, Drax, is located in the UK. According to the Guardian, Drax received about 2,1 million pounds a day from the British Government in 2019 to fund the burning of biomass. Drax imports all of its wood pellets, and about 80% comes from North America. US-based company Enviva, which owns and operates ten plants in America, is the largest wood pellet manufacturer in the world. The UK, and Drax, is one of Envivas biggest customers. Earlier this year

As previously explained, biomass energy is classified as carbon neutral since trees absorb carbon when they are replanted. However, this process takes time. In an open letter to the EU in 2018 signed by over 800 scientists, critical voices point out that it could take up to 100 years before that carbon is absorbed again.

Compared to fossil fuels, this is of course a short time frame in terms of renewability, but climate change is moving even quicker. According to the UN, we only have 10 years to make drastic emission cuts.

11

Drax claims that wood pellets cannot be linked to deforestation and describes their energy as “climate positive, nature positive, and people positive”. They also emphasize that wood pellets are made from residues within the forest industry. Enviva however states on its website that only about 25% of its wood is sawdust and other waste products. The rest is sourced directly from logging trees. As mentioned earlier, Enviva exports a lot of its products to Drax.

Both Drax and Enviva state they are utilizing forests in the most sustainable way possible.

Climate organizations like Dogwood Alliance and Natural Resources Defence Council on the other hand accuse the companies of clearcutting environmentally and biodiversity important forests.

There is also an environmental justice aspect to the biomass industry. In an interview with BBC from 2021, one woman says that ever since Enviva opened up a pellet plant close to their homes in North Carolina, many community members have been experiencing health issues such as breathing problems and nosebleeds. Similar issues are raised in a recent report from Greenpeace magazine Unearthed, investigating pellet mills run by Drax in America. The mills pollute the surrounding environment with organic chemicals that have been linked to several negative health impacts including breathing issues, skin irritation, dizziness, and cancer. Drax has paid millions of dollars in settlements

12

after three of their Louisiana pellet mills have been sued for breaking environmental regulations, Unearthed writes. These mills are more likely to be situated in deprived communities with high poverty levels.

Towards a green future In 2021 the EU published a revision of its Renewable Energy Directive as an attempt to clarify sustainability criteria for biomass and to protect highly biodiverse forests. This indicates a broadening understanding that biopower is a complex question. Reusing different waste products to generate energy appears as a good strategy as the need for alternative energy sources is urgent. However, in this pressing transition, the preservation of vital ecosystems such as forests should still be of the highest priority. As the wood

pellet industry presents plans to expand, economic incentives might pose a threat to the sustainability of forest management. The environmental justice issues connected to the placements and pollution of some of the world's biggest wood pellet manufacturers also highlight another important aspect of the rush to renewable energy. Our energy needs to not only be green, but it also needs to be just. ♦

Are you interested in international affairs and want to keep up-to-date with the latest together with other people with the same interests?

Join Utrikespolitiska Föreningen Göteborg!

For more info, go to ufgbg.se

Image by pch.vector on Freepik

13

Energy Dilemmas

Energy security, the environment, and indigenous rights

By Anita Tvedt Kaksrud The climate heats up, ecosystems face another mass extinction and expansive land use changes, and an energy crisis emerges. These three crises all require immediate action. The problem, however, is that these crises are inherently interlinked yet the measures each requires counteract the others. While it is crucial to increase energy production and availability and to expand renewable energy plants, land use change is the leading cause of species extinction while too often being a realization of colonial thinking, misuse of power, and human conflict. Especially vulnerable in situations like these are indigenous peoples and their rights. In other words, although increased energy availability is much needed, it brings forward dilemmas and trade-offs that force us to ask ourselves how much we are, or should be, willing to sacrifice.

Indigenous peoples' rights include the right to the land they use and identify with. However, this collective right to land is often vulnerable and tested to its furthest by non-indigenous actors seeking to expand economic activity on indigenous lands. This, sadly, is not a surprise considering the discrimination, assimilation, and even genocide indigenous peoples around the world have faced and still do. The colonial perception of indigenous peoples is very much still alive as it pictures them as either non-existent or primitive and in need of development and

14

assimilation into the majority culture. State actors can use this framing as they attempt to justify breaking the indigenous right to their land when such energy dilemmas emerge. Two of many examples of such cases are from the Mapuche people in Argentina and the Sámi people in Norway. Although their cases are different in terms of their history, how they are playing out, and what energy sources are being promoted, they both face the same fight – the right to exist as indigenous peoples on their lands.

The Mapuche and fracking In the case of Argentina, unconventional hydrofracturing, “fracking”, became especially important as a source of money and energy after Argentina’s financial collapse in 2001. This is when one of the largest unconventional oil reserves was found in a geological formation in Northern Patagonia – Vaca Muerta. The Argentinian state then signed a contract with the American oil company YPF to start fracking. This very area is also the home of the indigenous Mapuche people, and fracking developments have been built on specifically Mapuche-recognized territory. The impacts for Argentina as a whole and for the Mapuche are therefore uneven. It is the state who mainly benefits from economic growth and enhanced energy security. Meanwhile, the local Mapuche people have become on one of the indigenous groups worldwide to experience the most pollution, while also being added to the already too-long list of indigenous

peoples to be forcefully evicted. Additionally, the social dynamics and roles attached to such

The Samí and wind farms

extractive industries have reinforced damaging gender roles and machismo, which had led the women in the Vaca Muerta area to experience increased trafficking and femicides. However, the Mapuche people, just like indigenous peoples in general, are not passive victims. Although the state has put efforts into framing the Mapuche’s indigenous status as illegitimate by referring to them as solely opportunistic rebels who just need to accept development, the Mapuche engage in both formal politics, symbolism, and civil disobedience in their resistance and demand for legitimacy.

Though vastly different countries, Argentina and Norway do have a few things in common.

They both have large reserves and production of fossil fuels and a population of indigenous peoples.

One of the Mapuche women at the forefront of the fight against colonial-like extractivism is Moira Millán, who emphasizes how “the local effects that are provoked in our zone are not endemic, they are a part of a global policy”. The policy does indeed have a global reach, from the south of South America to the very north of the Nordics.

Moira Millán

Image by Cobertura Colaborativa Ella 2018 (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Recently, Norway has started to expand its efforts in wind farms in a much need effort to decrease dependence on fossil fuels. While this is good news regarding climate change, the expansion has caused conflicts over indigenous Samí people’s land and rights. Still, wind farms have been attempted to expand onto indigenous land. Norway’s largest wind farm, with the Norwegian state as the largest owner, was built on indigenous land which the Samí uses for their traditional reindeer husbandry.

Just like in Patagonia, the pursuit of energy was to be enforced at the expense of indigenous rights. Like the Mapuche, the Samí refuses to be disregarded and yet again harmed by the state.

Although the wind farm stood tall and ready The three interlinked crises – climate change, in 2019, both the UN and the Norwegian Su- mass extinction and land use change, and energy preme Court ruled in 2020 that the wind farm had breached the Samí human rights and that the state now must repair the damages it has caused.

However, the wind farm is still there three years later, and the Norwegian parliament insists on finding a compromise.

shortage – need to be handled with care if we are to avoid the unintentional consequence of building on the emerging fourth crisis of further restricting indigenous and human rights. ♦

Energy vs. human rights?

The question is then if we should or can compromise on human rights. Should it be okay to down-prioritize some human rights in face of the energy crisis?

If so, should the already marginalized indigenous peoples be the humans we decide to restrict rights for, yet again? Yet, without a fast increase in energy availability, even more people could suffer. Could it be okay to sacrifice the relatively few indigenous peoples for the majority of non-indigenous? Or does the history of imposed suffering on indigenous peoples leave the non-indigenous with a duty to conserve indigenous rights more carefully now? Adding the urgency and vast consequences of climate change to the equations makes this list of ethical questions even longer. For example, should indigenous people, who generally are associated with more sustainable environment management, be the ones to pay the price of climate change? Or is climate change already so urgent that it is justified to make current human rights less important?

The point is simple yet so complicated; the energy crisis is so complex that we should be wary of any easy solutions.

16

Mapuche women at the handover of land to the Mapuche Community Lorenzo Quintrileo de Tirúa Image by Ministerio Bienes Nacionales (CC BY 2.0)

17

Petroleum, a Blessing or a Curse?

By: Moltas Karlsson

One of the most famous observations in political science is that the most democratic countries in the world also tend to be the richest, while the most autocratic countries also tend to be the poorest. In 1959 this observation led to one of the most influential theories in politics, Seymour Martin Lipset’s modernization theory. According to the modernization theory, economic development in countries should be associated with democratic development, as economic progress contributes to important aspects of democracy such as education and infrastructure.

Although today the theory is much debated, a productive economy is still considered an important factor for democratic development.

Because of this, one might think that petroleum-rich countries more often than not should be amongst the most democratic countries in the world because of their great wealth. As we look at Norway and Canada, this is true. However, most of the time we see the opposite. The countries richest in petroleum actually tend to be amongst the most consolidated autocratic countries in the world. Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Russia are just some of the examples that can be listed as representations of this phenomenon.

While oil can be seen as one of the most powerful and beneficial resources a country can have, most citizens of oil-rich countries still seem to suffer. Why is this? How can countries which seem to have the economic tools to thrive, also tend to have both amongst the poorest and most oppressed citizens in the world?

for patronage. The wealth furthers the state's influence, which often overshadows the private sector while government jobs are also highly sought after, both of which are key mechanisms to retain political loyalty. More money at the state’s disposal can also lead to better control over crucial institutions, such as the military and police which provide the state with a firm grip on the citizens. Ross exemplifies the Arab spring to prove his point. The Arab spring was a democratic movement consisting of a series of protests and uprisings against regimes. The movement took place in northern Africa and the Arabian peninsula with the purpose of demanding more democracy as the vast majority of states were considered authoritarian or corrupt.

Ross argues that states not “blessed” with a lot of oil were more responsive to the movement compared to states with large oil production. Oil states were more effective at beating down and restricting resistance because their resources increased their state capacity which could be used to constrain and dampen opposition.

Another important mechanism is that the great wealth of oil also makes the state less dependent on taxes. According to Ross, taxes are an essential part to promote democracy. Less dependency on taxes takes away the people’s political participation. This is because when the people pay taxes it contributes to a greater demand of responsibility, hence making the government Michael Ross, a professor of political science more accountable. Without taxes, the demand at the University of California, has written and pressure on the state decrease, making it the book “The Oil Curse”. In the book, Ross easier for those in power to stay in power. highlights the presented issue and explains the mechanisms behind the complex nature of oil wealth and democratic absence. Ross explains that oil wealth gives the rulers a lot of money

19

Ross even claims that gender inequality in the Middle East sprung from the oil curse. A common perception is that Middle Eastern countries have less gender equality than much of the rest of the world because of cultural circumstances. Ross argues that culture is only a small part fueled and amplified by the oil profits in these countries. This is because oil tends to benefit male-dominated industries while sectors dominated by women tend not to witness the benefits from the supply, something which consequently restrains women in oil-dependent states while elevating men’s position in society.

To conclude Ross’ theory, though oil-rich countries tend to have some of the poorest citizens, certainly, someone benefits from the supply, this just tends to not be the people, but the governments. Ross’ theory is based on the thesis that governments in oil-rich countries benefit more without democracy than with it. The profits from oil thus increase the state’s capacity to control the people and rule without their

20

consent. In other words, governments benefit so great that they can use the profits to elevate their power and keep their authority.

The oil curse is just like all other theories regarding social sciences, not a law of nature in the meaning that exceptions do occur, Norway being the most eminent instance of these exceptions. The country is much dependent on oil, still, they are one of the most consolidated and prosperous democracies in the world. This is probably because of Norway’s early transition toward democracy accompanied by a number of other theories in political science explaining democratization and democracy. However, these explanations and a few exceptions are irrelevant to our issue, as the pattern of oil and autocracy is still strong. There are always exceptions in political science and explanations for why these are. Regardless, the necessary element to note is that exceptions don’t have to make a theory irrelevant, it simply makes the puzzle more complex.To demonstrate this pattern of oil and democratic absence, the map

illustrated above shows the top 30 most oil and gas-dependent countries in the world, that is, the countries in the world whose economies are most centralized around oil.

great wealth. As the dependency decreases, the regime’s latitude to suppress and implement undemocratic policies increases, which consolidates its power further.

The second map shows the same countries, except the ones in blue are considered “free” by FreedomHouse, a good indication to determine a country’s democratic condition. The map undeniably demonstrates the pattern of oil-dependent countries and the lack of democracy.

Besides Ross’ theory, states with deficient or rather non-existent democracy accompanied by possessions of large oil reserves could also be hard to democratize by intervening with financial tools.

The greatest threat to human existence and the most predominant challenge today is climate change. Thus, the threat to our existence has brought the shift toward renewable energy to the top of the agenda for numerous oil-consuming countries. Countries, which as of today, are important customers for the oil states. Therefore, the shift toward more green energy sources will greatly impact the states dependent on oil and gas.

For example, financial tools such as sanctions could put pressure on undemocratic states to reform policies, hence supporting the growth of democracy. But, when states obtain large quantities of oil, their dependency on foreign cooperation decreases as oil is a reliable source of

As countries move away from the usage of oil to find alternative sources of energy this will mean more excess in the states which provide themselves through oil. The excess will in turn cause a decline in the state's capacity, eroding the aggrandizement of regimes in power.

21

Ross suggests that this erosion of those in power could lead to two different outcomes. One outcome of regimes losing their power is that it could potentially lead to instability. This type of instability has been seen in many cases throughout history and isn’t usually very pretty. The other outcome, according to Ross, could be that the erosion results in more democracy.

The shift to renewable energy is dramatic for numerous reasons, I argue this is one of them. A shift toward not only green but perhaps even democratic and equal energy.♦

As the regime falls, it could potentially lead to democratic reforms and broader distribution amongst sources of income. A more diversified economy would then, perhaps, break the curse, forcing states to turn oil into an asset instead of a reliance, similar to the US. If this would be the case, not only would a shift to renewable energy be beneficial for the climate, but also democracy.It seems that petroleum is not always a blessing, but sometimes rather a curse.

Regardless of whether petroleum is a curse or not, and which one of Ross’ two possible outcomes turns out to be true, the shift from oil toward more “green energy” is inevitable.

Therefore, one can only hope that the shift will also lead to more democracy and equality rather than instability and turmoil.

Image by macrovector on Freepik

22

Image byChris Liverani on Unsplash

Like this article?

Every week Utblick publishes new articles at our website utblick.org.

Follow us on Instagram or Facebook to never miss an upload!

How the energy crisis is unfolding the deep-rooted biases

By Dominique Keizer The current energy crisis is evident in every aspect of our daily lives. Rising electricity bills and increased food prices are just examples of how we are becoming forced to rethink the sources of our energy consumption. Efi Koutsokosta & Jorge Liboreiro, two columnists from Euronews, looked at how institutions such as the European Commission are now challenged to develop measures to procure future prices and seek economic stability. One such initiative involves a joint procurement scheme to increase the purchasing power of the European Union (EU) and lower the prices. Yet, given the diversity of energy sources and mixes, most EU countries still seem to be resistant to signing the so-called “solidarity agreement”. With rising awareness onventional power of the challenges behind conventional me to address susgrids perhaps this is the time tainability and innovative solutions. Yet, one should remember thatt a solution is not always applicable to everyone.

Undoubtedly this energy crisis will spark creative schemes as to how to lessen the dependency on fuel-banstead sed energy sources and instead y sourintegrate renewable energy y exces (RES) with the already isting conventional ones. As

24

Image by macrovector on Freepik

shall be discussed in this article, the current innovations regarding energy use might have unprecedented social consequences if uncritically applied. Specifically, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its solution-driven role in the field of engineering might create a way forwards in the current crisis if inequity shall be appropriately included. Without taking into account gender or race, AI could exaggerate the already existing structural barriers.

At this exact moment, the engineering industry is highly pressured to sustainably manage the fragile balance of supply and demand within the energy sector. The challenge lies in conventional power grids not being designed to efficiently integrate renewable energy sources such as wind, solar or hydrogen.

Practically speaking, the threat is in meeting the variable loads of the power grid.

For that reason, scholars such as Tanveer Ahmad and Dongdong Zhang have researched how the energy industry can incorporate AI

technology to perform the task of forecasting and operating the power system efficiently.

The forecast is expected to reduce uncertainty through purchase management and distribution schedules. At first, one might argue this could be a solution to the current power crisis. However, it is relevant to not oversee that technologies also affect the way individuals interact and understand their reality.

Before diving into the social aspect, it is imperative to mention that technological developments definitely have the potential to benefit both individuals and the environment in a sustainable way. The implementation of AI in projects on biodiversity has allowed for instance to map the global biodiversity loss.

Dr. Bistra Dilkina, a computer scientist at Georgia Tech, is applying computing skills to optimise biodiversity corridor planning for different species. When looking at the field of energy engineering, AI has also helped in processing complex decision-making such as the environmental impact of solar and wind farm sites.

AI shall undoubtedly become the future of how we plan our way forwards in the post-energy crisis reality. As mentioned at the beginning of the article, the question remains whether everyone shall equally benefit from these innovations. It is seldom discussed that the unaddressed bias in data used to train AI algorithms might create new problems. Ricardo Vinuesa & Hossein Azizpour together with other scholars have recently published a paper on how both racial and gender bias in, for instance, face recognition tools portray the problems that AI practitioners still have to overcome. A positive future of AI is only

possible if we start questioning our perceptions of reality. In the end, the bias found in machine learning is a mirror of what we believe to be the truth.

When putting the gender bias of energy consumption into a broader context, it can be noted how energy poverty is unequally experienced within homes. One of the areas in which AI is implemented involves smart home management. This is to allow customers easier access to energy management through virtual power systems. Yet, as has been researched by Saska Petrova & Neil Simcock, ‘the home’ continues to be addressed as a homogenous entity without gender differences. What the current energy crisis has shown is that energy vulnerability is gendered. Specifically, the increase in energy prices is what has revealed and reiterated traditional gender roles.

Women are culturally expected to take care of household responsibilities. As a result, they face a disproportionate consequence of energy poverty. Limiting energy consumption in the house includes tactics such as adjusting the heating, limiting vacuuming or doing laundry during specific times. These activities are mostly undertaken by women which leads to increased emotional and physical labour. Feminised pro-environmental behaviour is happening at the expense of women’s time. It is the different energy-related roles of household members that eventually reshape vulnerabilities.

25

With that in mind, one could ask why women cannot change their reality by joining the decision-making process. Given their experiences of energy saving would it not be efficient to hear their voices? It is not that easy, however, as it may seem. Glass-ceiling into leadership positions is still a reality for many women. Even though the recruitment of women and girls is seemingly on the rise, they leave at a crucial point in their careers.

Barriers are still there when it comes to career advancement. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in fields such as science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) the average share of women accounts for only 28%. In the oil and gas industry, the share of women is only 22%.

Social and cultural norms tend to be the main barrier to diversifying the workforce with women being expected to take care of the household and childcare. Studies done

by IRENA have shown that the work-life balance becomes problematic for women if the work schedule is not adjusted to family and household duties through for instance flexible work hours. Lack of career information and networks, misperceptions of career pathways and mobility requirements form another obstacle. Now with the fastgrowing advancement of AI in many engineering fields, it is more relevant than ever to create opportunities for women’s engagement.

inforce the already visible gender bias. As covered by Tom Simonite, a previous San Francisco bureau chief at MIT Technology, a simple example of this bias has been shown by databases that portray women with domestic chores and men with sports.

Besides the gender dynamic, racial bias is still a dominant problem as well. Computer scientist Joy Buolamwini wrote for TIME how most facial analysis softwares do not recognise dark-skinned faces, given the system is trained on light-skinned men.

That is how the assumption of machines being neutral is wrong.

Partnership with gender experts and participatory design could help to recognise the gender and racial impacts of an algorithm.

This is the critical time to address how technologies affect individuals before AI can become part of the new every day. Scientist Joy Buolamwini also described how failed machine learning might also amplify sexist hiring practices, spread false information or make the criminal justice procedures racist.

The same applies to the energy sector. Energy vulnerability is just a continuation of the invisible discursive script of what is considered the norm. Energy infrastructure is not gender-neutral, as some would assume.

Without a critical assessment of how reality is experienced the promised breakthrough of technological solutions could reproduce systematic discrimination.

The already direct impact of this exclusiThe relevance of questioning the inclusivi- onary decision-making in the transition ty of the new energy solutions can be seen from fossil fuel to renewable energy can be in how Machine Learning (ML) tends to re- seen in the distributional inequity faced by

26

Sámi reindeer herders in the north of Sweden.

Columnist for The Guardian Karen McVeigh has written that forestry and mining projects are already expanding into traditional grazing grounds. In the last century alone the undisturbed reindeer habitat has become smaller by approximately 70%. This includes the floods of grazing lands while building the infrastructure for hydroelectric power. Besides the shrinking of the natural habitat of the reindeer, the Sámi people are also troubled by climate change.

Scholar Dorothee Cambou from the University of Helsinki has shown in her research that the Arctic is affected by the warming temperatures of climate change four times more than the rest of the world. Meaning, it is the Sámi people who understand the impact of human expansion into untouched environments.

Yet, similarly as in the case of women’s contri-

Image by NASA on Unsplash

bution to energy projects, the Sami communities face recognition obstacles to participate in the development of initiatives such as wind energy.We definitely need to change how we consume energy. However, let's not forget that the challenges faced by the Sami community could be a future mirror of how exclusion might look like.

Without a doubt, AI will be the new norm in our efforts to become more sustainable and energy efficient. The already existing initiatives such as the corridor planning for different animal species show that solutions do exist and there is still hope. But these solutions will only become solutions if we start questioning the algorithms. ♦

27

The securitization of energy in the light of the energy crisis: a CFSP concern?

Energy securitization

By Axèle Maillard Arricot The EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) was established in 1993 and has since been strengthened by many treaties.

The Common Foreign and Security Policy acts as the European Union (EU)’s foreign policy, mainly in the areas of security and defence diplomacy. It also participates in the EU’s external action, in the areas of trade and commercial policy. The CFSP is represented and chaired by Josep Borrell, the High Representative of the EU. As for many of the EU’s tools and policies, the main objective of the CFSP is “to preserve peace and strengthen international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter”.

The CFSP was initially created in order to coordinate and harmonize all of the Member States (MS)’s domestic foreign policies, and it now pursues and contributes to the wide array of different foreign policy objectives of the Union.

There exists a strong nexus between the CFSP and energy policy, as both the externalization and securitization of the EU’s energy market have enabled the development of the EU’s energy security policy, which can be thought of as a tool to ensure wider foreign policy objectives.

28

The security of energy supplies has been a major topic in debates around the globe and at different levels, and the development of an integrated EU energy policy has slowly been witnessed over the years. Debates surrounding EU energy policy have led to many claims regarding the ‘securitisation’ of energy.

Moreover, the Ukrainian crisis of 2014, and the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian conflict have relaunched those very debates on European energy security and acted as a catalyst for more EU energy autonomy. This can be illustrated through the different sets of EU sanctions against Russia, and the will to break the Union’s dependency on Russia by distancing itself and seeking new solutions.

However, what is energy securitization? One could define it as a process within which governments or institutions shape the issue of energy as a threat to national or international interests (or state interests). It is a phenomenon that is located at the intersection between different areas, such as economics, geopolitics, and security; which emerge from multi-level political structures (e.g. international and/or domestic). A fragmented governance and a failure to address energy security in the past, on both the international and European levels, have created a sense of emergency that ought to be met with the development of effective trade policy instruments to enhance EU energy security.

Image by Rochak Shuklaon Freepik

agreements are of crucial importance to the EU in its energy transition, notably throughout this energy crisis. At the Member States level, it is through bilateral agreements that the solidarity principle of the EU has enabled different MS to ratify agreements with each other. However, as proved by the infringement procedures introduced by the Commission in 2020, many Member States do not put the relevant regulation in effect, which has led to only six bilateral agreements being concluded (e.g.

Denmark and Germany). Thus, it seems that internal solidarity and energy trade represents a challenge to the EU and its Member States.

The concept of energy security is a crucial aspect of any economy’s long-term sustainability, and it deals with the ability of a country or economic block to sustainably provide for its long-term energy demands. The issue of energy security is not a new one, and it has been a concern of the EU for many years, as can be illustrated by the European Council’s ‘Energy Policy for Europe’ (2006). However, the development of energy security into a CFSP concern is quite Synergies between the CFSP and energy recent. Thus, it is safe to assume that energy securitization policy is a political and security concern just as much as it is economic.

As different geopolitical events unfold, there is a growing consensus within the EU to defend Energy securitization and the energy market its energy interests and priorities, notably through the use of its CFSP instruments. We Nowadays, the EU is experiencing many can assume that this is a direct consequence of challenges in the light of the energy crisis. the fact that the EU relies heavily on external The import dependency is increasing and there sources for its energy needs. Indeed, the EU is limited diversification, while the energy is illustrating a complex paradox: while it market is experiencing further integration consumes approximately one-fifth of the and interconnection, as well as high and world’s energy supply, it is also the largest volatile energy prices. A variety of measures importer of energy. This contradicting fact is aiming to provide solutions and achieve an accentuated by the lack of diversity within the integrated energy market, security of energy EU’s primary energy suppliers, namely four supply and a sustainable energy sector are non-EU members: Algeria, Lybia, Norway and at the core of the EU’s energy policy. The Russia. What’s more, as we have witnessed aim of the European Commission (EC) is to through the last security threats, the current diversify supply, enhance the production of energy supply is intrinsically linked to highly green energy and focus mainly on gas which politicized sources (i.e. Russia’s weaponisation influences the electricity markets. Bilateral of energy).

29

Image by Olga Nayda on Unsplash

30

When analyzing the relationship between the An important conclusion to draw is that the CFSP and energy securitization, it is important question of energy security as we are dealing with to bear in mind that the central issue to a complete and efficient securitization, is the lack of coherence of the EU foreign policy. Indeed, and as said previously, the CFSP was initially aimed at harmonizing the Member States’ foreign policies into one, at the EU level. However, the internal bureaucratic structure of the EU, coupled with the Member States’ national interests makes it complicated for the EU to act coherently in international relations. As an example, in light of the current events, the EU is divided into Member States striking a bilateral deal with Putin, while others point fingers and incriminate their neighbours for doing so (i.e. Germany and the Nord Stream 2 project - lead to mistrust between the EU Member States).

it nowadays need not to be restrained to the area of foreign and security policy, but rather it needs to be set in a broader policy context. Indeed, policies relating to economic implications, or climate change and the environment, are crucial to be explored and considered in order to provide efficient policies. policies.♦

The lack of trust between the different Member States, and which surrounds the Union as a whole, represents a risk for full securitization of the energy matter. The EU as an institution has long considered Russia as a threat, notably because of its approach to striking agreements, and thus it has always called for more cohesion, coherence and strategy. It is after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, that the EU has somewhat successfully shown its capacities, and will, to act as a single voice and managed to - partially - reach the initial goal of the CFSP. Different competencies and institutions overlap in the context of energy security. While the EU possesses a market size that gives it great leverage, and a high number of instruments at its disposal to bear on negotiations, it should not fall into the trap of prioritising energy as a foreign and security policy, at the risk of missing out on the intertwinement of many different policies.

31

The Merit Order Effect

By Natalia Olsson Orio The merit order effect is a phenomenon within the topic of energy that is comparably new and has not been talked about enough, especially since energy is a very hot topic today. The merit order effect is, simply put, a lowering effect of the wholesale electricity price when the percentage of renewable energy sources increases in the energy mix. As we are moving towards replacing our energy sources towards more sustainable ones, this is an important phenomenon to be aware about and to expand research on. It has not been thoroughly studied if the merit order effect will last in the long run, but what little studies have been made suggest this is only a temporary effect. The merit order effect may also cause the electricity market to need to be re-designed.

The merit order effect is something that needs to take more space in the energy discussion as we move towards a world that aims to become more sustainable in its use of energy.

Image by pch. vector on Freepik

32

In a study by Gielen, Boshell, Sayigin, Brazilian, Wagner and Grini from 2019, the authors wrote the emissions of CO2 related to energy constitute about two thirds of the global greenhouse gas emissions. The authors further explain that there has to be a global energy transition from fossil sources to sustainable and renewable ones if the Paris Agreement’s 2 degree goal is to be reached. However, the renewable energy sources that hold most potential are ones that are variable and difficult to manually control to make sure the electricity supply meets the demand, López Prol and Schill write in their paper from 2021, which fluctuates over both in time during the day and throughout the year. The lowering effect on the price of increasing the share or renewably sourced energy in the energy mix may also demand a restructuring of our electricity markets, according to Breakthrough Energy.

Before going into the explanation behind what exactly happens for the merit order effect to occur, there is some important information that needs to be gone through. Different energy sources have different dispatchabilities, which is well explained by López

Prol and Schill, as well as Breakthrough Energy. Dispatchability describes how easily an energy source can be controlled manually. For instance, the conventional energy sources such as gas turbines, are classified as dispatchable energy sources, since they can be turned off and on to only produce electricity when demand is high, thus having high operational flexibility.

There are some renewable energy sources that are dispatchable, such as bioenergy, hydropower and geothermal energy, but they have limited potential. The renewable energy-generating technologies that are easier to develop and that have higher potential are non-dispatchable: different kinds of solar power and onand offshore windpower. Why these are called non-dispatchable is because the energy these sources generate are determined by the sun and the wind, which are factors us humans cannot control manually. As such, only the amount of energy that the sun and the wind allows will be produced; there is low operational flexibility.

Another important thing to know about is the relationship between dispatchability and variable costs, and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) provides a thorough explanation of this. Variable costs are determined by how much operational flexibility an energy source has; a source that has low operational flexibility has low to no variable costs, because there simply is nothing to control; what’s being generated is what is being generated, due to the amount of sunshine orr wind. Energy sources that can easily be controlled, however, have high variable costs; they can easily be turned off and on and easily control how much energy is to be generated. Due to the variable costs being lower for non-dispatchable energy sources, these are the ones

to first be dispatched on the electricity market.

Another reason is that these sources cannot be used to regulate so that supply meets demand; that is what the dispatchable sources are for.

The dispatchable sources are used in the times of day and year when non-dispatchable renewable sources are not enough to meet demand, and so are the last sources to be dispatched onto the electricity market.

Onto the actual merit order effect, which López Prol and Schill write in detail about in their paper from 2021. The price and the quantity of electricity will be determined by the point where supply meets demand. What is slightly different from the electricity market to other markets is its shape.

Here it can be described as having a staircase shape (see Figure below), where the different levels represent different amounts in variable p

costs (or dispatchability, as the variable cost is in essence determined by a source’s dispatchability). The lower levels represent sources that have no to low variable costs, and the higher the level, the higher the variable costs.

33

If the share of renewably sourced energy increases, then the share of zero variable cost sources increases. As the share of zero variable cost sources increase, this will cause the wholesale electricity price (which is the price that consumers pay for electricity) to decrease. Increasing the share of renewably sourced energy causes the share of fossil sourced energy to decrease. As such the variable costs decrease, and the price for the consumers decreases.

This is a very fortunate effect for consumers, Antweiler and Muesgens write in their paper from 2021, however, it is not clear if this effect will last in the long run. Theoretically, this should only be a short-term effect. Gelabert, Labandeira and Linares have explained it in their paper from 2011 as when the electricity price decreases, this will cause a long term signal indicating that it is not worth investing in this; the revenue is decreasing.

The investments would then over time deteriorate, and eventually the electricity price will increase again, because there is only so much electricity that can be renewably sourced. Antweiler and Muesgens, on the other hand, have come to the potential conclusion that the merit order effect could be a by-product of a slow paced capacity adjustment of fossil sourced electricity; the supply of fossil sourced electricity takes time to adjust to how much electricity renewable sources can supply when they expand.

Because the wholesale prices decrease due to the merit order effect, there might be a need for a restructuring of the electricity market as we know it today, Breakthrough Energy writes. If the wholesale price decreases, that means less revenue for investors, and so they may turn away from investing in dispatchable and non-dispatchable renewably sourced energies, which is not desirable. Increasing renewably sourced energy on the

34

electricity market is essential, as we need these technologies to provide at least 42% of the total global electricity generation by 2040 if the Paris Agreement is to be met, according to López Prol and Schill.

We need to open up this discussion to make sure we are prepared for the transformation that is needed and the effects of increasing the share of renewable sources of electricity, if we are to be successful.♦

Image by Nicholas Doherty on Unsplash

Utblick Magazine is a magazine under the umbrella of The Society of International Affairs in Gothenburg. The Society of International Affairs in Gothenburg (Utrikespolitiska föreningen i Göteborg – UF) is a politically and religiously independent association that belongs to Utrikespolitiska förbundet Sverige (UFS).

We have sister associations represented in ten other UF cities. We arrange lectures, Model United Nations, broadcast radio and publish our magazine Utblick.

Our ambition is to be a place where people from various courses, nationalities and interests can meet to broaden their knowledge about international and global issues as well as other countries’ culture, population, religion and political systems.

Follow us on Facebook: UF - Utrikespolitiska Föreningen Göteborg Instagram @ufgbg And read more about us on our website ufgbg.se