Rethinking Energy Security: Europe’s Dilemma in a Turbulent World
A Crucial Moment for European Leaders
As the Munich Security Conference approaches on February 13, European leaders are faced with a significant conundrum: how to restructure their energy reliance amid geopolitical upheaval. Following the World Economic Forum in Davos, where incidents like US President Donald Trump’s aggressive posturing towards Greenland and Venezuela were highlighted, a critical reassessment of dependency on American liquefied natural gas (LNG) is now on the table. This tightening grip of US energy supply calls for a deeper examination of what true energy security should look like.
Historic Dependencies
The question of Europe’s energy security isn’t novel. The seismic impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine four years ago forced European nations to confront their longstanding reliance on Russian hydrocarbons. While the initial response included commitments to accelerate a green transition, the reality has been an increased dependence on LNG imports from the US. Germany, for instance, has rapidly developed new LNG terminals to accommodate the influx of American gas, revealing a troubling shift rather than a genuine transition toward renewable energies.
Economic Commitments and its Pitfalls
The handshake trade deal between the EU and the US last year has deepened this dependency, which includes a commitment to purchase $750 billion worth of US energy by 2028. Despite these frameworks, the EU still found itself sourcing an estimated 13% of its gas from Russia in 2025. This contradiction raises uncomfortable questions about whether the EU has merely replaced one dependence with another—funding conflicts with a new ally while still partially financing the war against Ukraine.
Green Transition: Progress and Stagnation
Important strides have been made in Europe’s green transition. By 2024, renewable solar energy saw a significant uptick, surpassing coal in electricity generation. Simultaneously, the reliance on gas power has reportedly declined for the fifth consecutive year. However, these advancements exist alongside a more traditional energy security discourse that inaccurately equates control over fossil fuels with power in the global arena.
The Concept of Fossil-Fuel Insecurity
This framing fails to consider what can be termed as “fossil-fuel insecurity.” At its core, this concept encapsulates the insecurities created by a continued dependence on fossil fuels. The devastating environmental and health impacts on local communities—often overlooked—are exacerbated by an ever-widening gap in wealth and power. Furthermore, regimes like Vladimir Putin’s thrive on oil and gas revenues, using them to finance military action and suppress dissent.
Economic Vulnerabilities and Costs
The cold, hard data tells a troubling story. Fossil-fuel price volatility and reliance can lead to economic turmoil, exemplified by spiraling costs and debt distress in nations heavily dependent on these resources. Beyond this financial strain are the environmental risks posed by oil spills and pipeline leaks, creating broader vulnerabilities in energy systems.
The Broader Economic Impact of Climate Change
The downstream ramifications of fossil-fuel reliance manifest not just on the environment but also in economic outputs. The major fossil-fuel companies often act with impunity, their operations significantly contributing to the climate breakdown. The economic toll is staggering, with climate-related disasters reportedly costing around $299 billion in damages in 2022, while long-term projections suggest that rising sea levels could rack up losses between $400 billion and $520 billion by 2100.
The Need for a Holistic Approach
This ongoing reliance underscores a fundamental misunderstanding of energy security. The chaotic events leading up to the Munich Security Conference serve as a stark reminder that we have entered a new era of insecurity largely driven by fossil fuels.
To foster true energy security, political leaders must openly acknowledge and address these vulnerabilities linked to overdependence on hydrocarbons. It is crucial to disentangle future energy security from the shackles of oil, gas, and coal.
A Call for Systemic Transformation
This leads to an essential inquiry: How do we pursue genuine energy security? The answer lies in a systemic overhaul of the energy sector. Simply relying on electrification and technological innovation is no longer sufficient. A fundamental transformation is required to tackle the trillions of dollars lost due to fossil-fuel dependence and the future costs of inaction.
Leaders need to engage in cross-domain thinking, connecting issues of military readiness with climate change, and understanding that clinging to outdated energy paradigms will only exacerbate future climate harms.
Military Spending vs. Fossil-Fuel Dependency
Moreover, an increased military budget won’t guarantee the stability European leaders seek when continued reliance on a fossil-fuel economy poses significant challenges to achieving long-term security.
Toward a Sustainable Future
In summary, the imperative for Europe is clear. Political and economic leaders must embrace a new narrative that connects the fragility of fossil-fuel dependence with the urgency for sustainable energy solutions. This is about more than just energy; it’s a matter of existential security for future generations.
Pauline Sophie Heinrichs is a lecturer in War Studies (Climate and Energy Security) at King’s College London.