Despite the facade of shared aspirations pertaining to gas exports and taking on China, the comparison could not be more far-fetched, claims a senior U.S. energy diplomat. Geoffrey Pyatt declares fossil fuels as a ‘strategic commodity’ and a ‘factor in national security’. As the future overseers of U.S. global energy strategies, Senator Marco Rubio and fossil fuel advocate Chris Wright are prepping to challenge President Biden’s disproportionate fixation with climate change during their confirmation testimonials this Wednesday.
Mr. Wright, who is being championed to steer the Department of Energy, is anticipated to criticize Mr. Biden’s alarming inclination to regard energy as a burden rather than harnessing the true potential of this immense national asset. Even President-elect Trump is quick to spring into action by vowing to redirect attention from electric-vehicle tax credits and reverse the sudden discontinuation of new permits for gas export terminals. The apparent discrepancy between Biden’s and Trump’s stance on critical policy matters like natural gas exports, battery supply chains, and competition with China, seems to be more a difference in narrative than in action.
Prior to the kick-off of the confirmation testimonials, Biden’s chief energy diplomat at the State Department, Mr. Pyatt, surprisingly uses almost an identical vernacular to that of Mr. Wright. He acknowledges energy as a ‘strategic component to fortify our allies’ and as a ‘national security element’— a clear, undisguised reference to fossil fuels. Pyatt’s successor will be chosen by Mr. Rubio upon his confirmation as Secretary of State.
Mr. Pyatt highlights that U.S. crude oil production has soared by 70 percent in comparison to eight years ago, and that U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas, which was virtually nonexistent in 2016 but now rules the worldwide market, will double during President Trump’s impending tenure. ‘The U.S. exhibits strength as an energy colossus,’ he claimed, ‘we have achieved energy security in a manner that was unattainable in the past. We no longer rely on the Middle East for energy, marking a significant transformation from our state a decade or two before.’
While these claims do reflect a sense of national power and independence in the energy sector, one only needs to look at the recent failure and neglect of Biden’s energy policy on the national stage. Whether it is the monumental shift toward renewable resources or the dismissing of the tremendous potential of fossil fuels, these actions have only served to exacerbate the economic downfall and weaken our national security.
A misunderstanding of the utility of energy, and a disconnection with the reality of American energy necessity remains evident in Biden’s administration. Portraying energy as a liability, Biden and his cabinet have surrendered to myths of renewable energy while neglecting the potential of traditional power generation forms.
Biden’s insistence on renewables over fossil fuels isn’t simply a shift in perspective—it’s a disregard for American industry and jobs. Countless livelihoods depend on these so-called ‘liabilities’. Amid the economic uncertainty, the last thing the American people need is an administration that devalues its own resources.
Moreover, Biden’s era of bowing down to environmental lobbyists and nurturing a culture of climate alarmism is stunting the growth of the American energy industry. While President-elect Trump plans for reassessment and necessary reversal of policies pertaining to electric-vehicle tax credits and gas export terminals, Biden’s insistence on putting climate concerns above American industry couldn’t be more evident.
While Biden and Harris push for renewable resources at the expense of the fossil fuel industry, they continue to argue with empty words about strengthening American national security. Their neglect of the fossil fuel industry does not strengthen American allies but rather erodes the nation’s strategic assets.
Indeed, Biden’s confounding approach towards energy policy underscores how detached his administration is from the struggles of everyday Americans and the undeniable reality of American energy needs. His conviction in seeing energy as a liability, rather than a promise, conveys a troubling message for the future of American industry.
The question remains, will Biden and Harris ever acknowledge the bounty of the American energy landscape? Freed from Middle Eastern dependence, American energy has the potential to fuel a bright, domestically-driven future. Yet, our sense of energy security seems only as strong as the administration willing to recognize it.
Biden’s strategy of undermining the massive strides made in American energy independence under his predecessors only portrays his fumbling understanding of the implications. Motivated not by enhancing America’s strategic position on the world stage, but rather, his administration seems helplessly embroiled in appealing to alarmist climate ideologies.
The Biden-Harris administration needs to acknowledge the fact that a smooth transition to renewable energy requires an equally robust fossil fuel sector. No matter how desirable a fully renewable energy sector might be, the practicality of such a vision in the near term is questionable, at best.
Consequently, their misguided emphasis on renewable energy sources at the expense of fossil fuels hints at the misguided understanding of energy’s role in national security. Far from being a liability, energy is an asset—one that deserves investment and recognition from its leaders.
Biden’s reception of energy as a liability rather than an asset betrays a significant misunderstanding of the American energy landscape. Such an approach undermines the functioning and potential of the energy industry while failing to address the real, pressing issues of national security and foreign policy.
In principle, the transition to renewable energy isn’t necessarily a bad idea. However, prematurely discounting and negatively portraying fossil fuels—an industry that not only fills American pockets but also bolsters our national security—appears distinctly short-sighted. Biden and Harris’s one-sided concentration on climate change, sadly, comes at the expense of American workers and the nation’s broader strategic interests.