Also in this edition of the newsletter: A map that shows imperiled biodiversity in the lower 48 states.
How do you ensure energy security on a hotter planet? That’s the thorny new question that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine presents to many countries, most immediately in Europe. The leaders of the European Union are expected to announce a proposal next week that would “accelerate the clean energy transition and reduce permanently our dependence on imports of natural gas.” If it goes through, it could significantly blunt one of the Kremlin’s most formidable economic weapons: piped gas to heat and power the continent. It also raises an uncomfortable question: Why did it take a full-blown attack on civilians to speed up climate action? The 26-page E.U. draft proposal, seen by The New York Times, proposes to swiftly renovate old, leaky buildings to reduce energy demand, simplify regulations to attract investments in renewable energy, encourage more rooftop solar installations and produce more energy from biomass. At the moment, Russia supplies nearly 40 percent, on average, of the gas that European countries use for heat and electricity. For some countries, like Germany, that reliance is even higher, and that gives President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia outsize leverage in his war against Ukraine. It also makes it very hard for Europe (and the United States) to impose sanctions on Russia’s fossil fuel industry, the country’s main moneymaker. When I talk about gas, I mean what is generally referred to as natural gas, because, like coal, it is derived from nature. It would be more accurate to call it methane gas, because methane, a potent pollutant, is its main component. In the near term, according to the draft E.U. energy strategy, Europe is not giving up on gas. The plan proposes to increase the storage of gas, and, in order to reduce its reliance on piped gas from Russia, it proposes to diversify to liquefied natural gas, also a fossil fuel. The United States sends L.N.G. to Europe — a lot of it. So, any European transition away from Russian gas has major implications for American gas producers. By the end of this year, the United States is expected to have the world’s largest export capacity for liquefied natural gas. The American oil and gas industry and its political champions have seized on the conflict in Ukraine to call for more production, as my colleague Hiroko Tabuchi wrote, though that would take years to come online and do very little to bring down energy prices.
