Fossil fuels no longer offer security. Clean energy can
While historical energy crises spurred renewable adoption, current economic conditions like inflation and high interest rates pose investment challenges. Despite these obstacles, growing public support and the undeniable security benefits of renew...

But then came the war in Iran, a global curve ball that’s bound to change our collective future in unpredictable ways. In the face of yet another energy crisis — just four years after the one sparked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — the question of whether clean energy’s upward trajectory will be among the disruptions is an urgent one.
While these types of shocks strengthen the case for renewables, which offer both secure supply and stable prices, they also tend to create fiscal conditions — rising inflation, higher interest rates, supply chain disruptions — that aren’t exactly conducive to the investment required to fund new clean energy projects.
So, which forces will win out? History can be instructive.
The two oil shocks of the 1970s, precipitated by the Yom Kippur war in 1973 and the Iranian Revolution in 1979, spurred the first push towards energy efficiency. The US, for example, introduced a national maximum speed limit and Americans lost their taste for huge gas-guzzlers. Other nations were spurred on to explore alternative domestic sources: Denmark decided to pursue wind power, while France constructed 50 nuclear reactors in a decade. Yes, the world remained hooked on hydrocarbons, but the crises started something important.
The 2022 price spike, caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, may have been the first energy shock where the security benefits of renewables were truly appreciated. Countries took steps to double down on the transition, committing more funds to renewables and electrification — though it wasn’t all clear skies. High interest rates hit the wind sector particularly hard, leading to supply chain bottlenecks, cancelled projects and job cuts. But, as in the 70s, the ultimate result was progress.


Though Asia has felt the brunt of the price impact, Europe has also suffered, especially in terms of jet fuel and diesel. On Wednesday, European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen said that the EU’s fossil-fuel imports bill had increased by more than €27 billion ($32 billion) in just 60 days. Throughout the continent, countries that have made the most progress with clean energy sources, such as France and Spain, are patting themselves on the back as their electricity prices are expected to remain relatively low even if the conflict persists and drives up gas prices.

The economic toll of the war could mean countries need to cut spending currently earmarked for climate investment in order to support their residents through a fuel and food crisis. If interest rates rise again, as they did in 2022, capital intensive wind and solar developments could be in danger; a study from the University of Oxford’s Smith School found that increased financing costs have a greater negative impact on the cost-competitiveness of renewables than fossil-fuel projects.
Now, we’re starting to understand that hydrocarbon dependence is no longer a reliable way to grow an economy. Recalling the 2022 energy shock, Nic Fulghum, senior data analyst at Ember, told me: “People don’t want to go through these high inflation periods every four years.” Polling supports this. A March survey conducted by Cluster17 for POLITICO found that people overwhelmingly support shifting to renewables, with 39% saying Europe should accelerate the transition even if energy costs rise in the short term. Just 17% said the EU should prioritize price over environmental impact.

In a speech last week, Ed Miliband, the UK’s energy security and net zero secretary, declared: “The era of fossil fuel security is over, and the era of clean energy security must come of age.” He’s right.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.