Search

Begin New Search Topic Energy Political Geography United States of America

1. ‘Maximum pressure’ sanctions on Venezuela help US adversaries, hurt Venezuelans

Author:
William Tobin
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The “maximum pressure” strategy employed from 2018 to 2022 against the illegitimate Nicolás Maduro regime in Venezuela did not serve US interests. Stringent oil sanctions imposed on Venezuela forced the retreat of Western oil firms from the country, principally benefitting adversaries. During the maximum pressure campaign, Venezuela’s oil production was rerouted to China at discounted prices, Iran supplied the diluent Venezuela required for oil production, and Russian investors became more critical amid a dearth on Western investment. A democratic transition remained elusive while repression and human rights violations continued. Venezuelans suffered, US adversaries expanded their influence, and Maduro remained. The current system of issuing specific licenses for Western oil producers to operate in Venezuela has yielded superior results. The benefits of this policy have been the following: Venezuelan oil exports have been diverted to friendly nations. Treasury has increased visibility on all oil-related transactions, decreasing the clandestine shipment of oil through shadow tanker fleets operated by the Chinese defense establishment, Iran, or PDVSA. Compensation to the regime is limited to taxes and royalties, which are required by Venezuelan law. The system has enabled the return or reemployment of qualified engineers and technicians to restore production from degraded oilfield infrastructure. The incoming US administration should prioritize inflicting more harm on the regime and its enablers than the Venezuelan people—or US interests. To do so, sanctions must be linked to clear objectives. An uncalibrated reapplication of maximum pressure would cede influence to China, Russia, and Iran, while doing little to loosen the regime’s grip on power. Instead, the existing system of specific licenses should be maintained and expanded. To punish Maduro, the administration should continue to target individuals who enable his illegitimate rule, adding to the 180 individuals already sanctioned by the Treasury. A targeted sanctions policy—not maximum pressure—is the only way to ensure that US actions to confront the Maduro regime impose their desired effect, and do not play into the hands of Beijing, Moscow, or Tehran.
Topic:
Markets, Governance, Sanctions, Geopolitics, Economy, and Energy
Political Geography:
South America, Latin America, Venezuela, and United States of America

2. Not yet Trump-proof: an evaluation of the European Commission’s emerging policy platform

Author:
Heather Grabbe and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The economic strategy being defined by the 2024-2029 European Commission seems to follow the prescriptions on innovation and single market reform, and the expansive approach to industrial policy, set out by Mario Draghi in his September 2024 report on European Union competitiveness, with two important differences. First, the Commission stops short of calling for World Trade Organisation-prohibited subsidies – this is welcome. Second, the Commission proposes a new state aid framework for national industrial policy rather than expansion of EU-level public investment funding. This runs the risk of weakening the single market and harming competition, with the unintended consequence of protecting incumbents and inhibiting structural change. In terms of specific policies, on defence, the Commission is right to face up to the challenge of defining an EU procurement mechanism that offers sufficient speed and cost advantages to justify large-scale funding. On economic security and international partnerships, the Commission is right to take a broader approach than a foreign economic policy focused only on supply chains. What is lacking is a much greater commitment to providing support for climate mitigation in developing countries. The second Trump presidency creates risks for the Commission strategy. President Trump has gone further than expected in threatening territorial expansion and with the speed, aggression and disregard for the rule of law with which he has started to implement his policies. These factors will complicate the EU-United States relationship. The best defence against both Trump and the competitive and security threats posed by China is to accelerate policies that address the EU’s structural weaknesses: raising productivity growth, defence capacity and economic security. Economic security, in turn, requires more resilient trade relationships, less financial dependence on the US and an improved standing with emerging market and developing economies. The EU should also seize the opportunity offered by the shift in US policy from subsidies to deregulation. While the EU should not race Trump to the bottom on environmental or financial deregulation, it should rapidly improve its own regulatory framework while building on its core strengths: human capital and the rule of law. Unlike tariff wars or discriminatory subsidies, a competition to provide a good business environment is not a zero-sum game.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Industrial Policy, Budget, European Union, Digital Economy, Trade Policy, Donald Trump, Sustainability, European Commission, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

3. Net-Zero and Nonproliferation: Assessing Nuclear Power and Its Alternatives

Author:
Henry D. Sokolski
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
Abstract:
Six years ago, NPEC ran a mock execution of a law Congress passed in 1978 but that the Executive refused to implement —Title V of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act of 1978. Title V called on the State and Energy Departments to conduct country-specific analyses of how developing states might best meet their energy needs without nuclear power. It also called for the creation of an energy Peace Corps and an assessment of what our government was spending on energy development aid-related projects. When NPEC started its efforts, the staff on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee asked to see what NPEC produced to use it to pressure the Executive finally to implement the law. NPEC commissioned a number of studies on how Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, and Taiwan might best meet their energy requirements without nuclear power. The center also contracted studies on the history and intent of Title V and on what government programs were already in play that aligned with Title V‘s stated objectives. As soon as NPEC’s project was completed, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff prepared a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking the Secretary finally to implement Title V and file the reports required by law. Then, something unexpected occurred. The committee’s legal counsel discovered that the Secretary was under no obligation to comply: Congress had eliminated Title V’s reporting requirements along with several hundred other Congressionally mandated reports back in 1995. Flummoxed, I quietly set the book manuscript aside. Why, then, release it today? Because it is again timely. In October, the Biden Administration announced it is still considering extending civilian nuclear cooperation with Riyadh that would allow the Kingdom to enrich uranium — a process that can bring states within weeks of acquiring the bomb. Administration officials no longer question if Saudi Arabia really needs nuclear energy to meet its energy requirements. Shouldn’t they? Meanwhile, Taiwan’s presidential election this coming Saturday will, among other things, decide if Taiwan will build more nuclear reactors or not. Again, is new nuclear Taiwan’s best energy bet? As for China, the Pentagon has become increasingly concerned that the two “peaceful” fast breeder reactors and plutonium reprocessing plants Beijing is building will be used to make hundreds of bombs worth of weapons plutonium. One of the two fast breeder reactors is already operating. The question these dangerous nuclear activities raise is just how necessary they are to meet China’s energy requirements. Then, there’s Iran, which is intent on building reactors of Iranian design. It plans on expanding its nuclear power program from roughly one gigawatt electrical capacity to 11. Given Iran’s renewables potential and oil and gas reserves, how much sense does this make? Finally, in its efforts to achieve net zero, the Biden Administration has joined 20 other nations in pledging to triple global nuclear generation by 2050. Again, how practical is this? This volume’s aim is to help provide answers. Of course, in light of how long our government has ignored Title V, demanding it be implemented now would be odd. Creating a clean energy Peace Corps, comparing the costs of different types of energy, and trying to determine what investments would reduce emissions quickest and cheapest, however, all should be discussed. It’s my hope that the release of Net-Zero and Nonproliferation: Assessing Nuclear Power and Its Alternatives today might prompt such discussion.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Nuclear Power, Nonproliferation, Legislation, Energy, and Net Zero
Political Geography:
China, Iran, Middle East, Taiwan, Asia, Saudi Arabia, North America, and United States of America

4. The State of EU-US Digital and Energy Cooperation

Author:
Federica Marconi, Wolfgang Münchau, and Irene Paviotti
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In a time of rapid technological advancements and changing energy paradigms, the European Union and the United States are trying to coordinate their efforts to navigate the complexities of an ever-evolving landscape. Transatlantic dialogues and cooperative endeavours are key mechanisms for mitigating tensions and fostering a common assessment of the opportunities and risks arising from these advancements. Critical in this regard are the problems of governance emanating from technological development and its consequences in the digital sphere as well as the delicate balance between security, competitiveness and environmental targets in the energy dimension.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, Political Economy, Governance, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, Digital Policy, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

5. Climate action: Implications for factor market reallocation

Author:
Robert Z. Lawrence
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
This paper considers climate policies, not from the perspective of their environmental impacts, but rather their likely effects on labor and investments. While the aggregate impact of the green transition on jobs and investment may be modest, it will require significant reallocation of labor and capital within and across industries. Although the green transition brings new opportunities for employment and investment in renewable technologies, many workers and communities tied to the fossil fuel industry may not benefit from these advances due to skills mismatch and geographic constraints. Both the United States and the European Union acknowledge the importance of achieving “climate justice” and “leaving no one behind” in their decarbonization efforts. However, current policies and resources in the United States may fall short, with inadequate assistance reaching too many communities and a narrow focus on green jobs. In Europe, while the Just Transition Fund complements existing programs, effective implementation of place-based policies remains challenging due to the need for specific, localized responses.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Labor Issues, European Union, and Energy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Redefining US strategy with Latin America and the Caribbean for a new era

Author:
Jason Marczak, Maria Fernanda Bozmoski, and Matthew Kroenig
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The strategic interest of the United States and the countries of Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) lies in strengthening their western hemisphere partnership. Shared borders, economic interests, and security alliances bind these nations, along with a common goal for prosperity. However, the perception of waning US interest and the rise of external influences necessitate the rejuvenation of and renewed focus on this partnership. In May 2023, the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security established the US-LAC Future Strategy Working Group to redefine the US-LAC partnership. This strategy promotes mutual and inclusive economic growth, renewed cooperation through enhanced commercial and investment ties, a renewed paradigm on bolstering security and reducing migration flows across the region, and a focus on preparedness in the face of natural disasters and the energy transition. Acting on this strategy could significantly benefit US economic and security interests. The United States should capitalize on immediate opportunities, like promoting nearshoring as a means to growth and prosperity across the Americas, while maintaining a medium-term strategy tailored to each country’s specific needs. This strategy paper highlights the importance of adaptability and practicality, particularly as the global economic landscape evolves and power shifts foresee new leading economies by mid-century. In addition, the strategy advocates for the significance of the US-LAC relationship amid the recalibration of US worldwide interests.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Migration, Politics, Economy, and Energy
Political Geography:
Latin America, Caribbean, and United States of America

7. Geoeconomic fragmentation and net-zero targets

Author:
Shirin Hakim and Amin Mohseni-Cheraghlou
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The second half of the twentieth century experienced significant economic integration. International trade, cross-border migration, capital flows, and technological diffusion increased per capita incomes across countries and reduced global poverty. However, events such as the global financial crisis of 2007 to 2009, Brexit, and the COVID-19 pandemic—all against the backdrop of escalating great power rivalry and tensions between the United States and China—have demonstrated the rise of geoeconomic fragmentation (GEF). Since the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, a growing numberof world leaders have addressed the impacts of GEF on global energy and agricultural markets. For one, higher and increasingly volatile food and energy prices have made it increasingly difficult for developing nations to prioritize environmental concerns and implement sustainable development initiatives.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Trade and Finance, Economy, Economic Growth, Inclusion, Energy, Geoeconomics, and Net Zero
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and United States of America

8. The Role of the United States in Just Energy Transition Partnerships in Indonesia and Vietnam

Author:
Melinda Martinus
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Melinda Martinus, Lead Researcher focusing on Climate Change in Southeast Asia and sustainable development at ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, explores the Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) for Indonesia and Vietnam against the backdrop of the upcoming US presidential election.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Partnerships, Climate Finance, Energy, Climate Justice, and Energy Transition
Political Geography:
Indonesia, Vietnam, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

9. The US-India Clean Energy Partnership and Quad Provide Overlapping Pathways to Produce Clean Energy

Author:
Nischal Dhungel and Sethuram Senthil Kumar
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Mr. Nischal Dhungel and Mr. Sethuram Senthil Kumar, Consultant at the World Bank Group and Energy Engineer at both TRC Companies, Inc. and MCFA, respectfully, explain that "Robust partnerships with the United States, strategic cooperation within the Quad framework, and collective efforts across the Indo-Pacific region drive India's transformation in the energy sector."
Topic:
Climate Change, Economics, Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Governance, and Energy
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, Nepal, North America, and United States of America

10. Revisiting GTCC and GTCC-Like Nuclear Waste Disposal in the United States

Author:
Matt Bowen, Maya Lameche, and Marine Gapihan
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
While the United States (US) has facilities that can and do dispose of most low-level nuclear waste (LLW), it does not yet have a viable disposal pathway for two categories of waste: so-called greater-than-class-c (GTCC) nuclear waste, and nuclear waste with characteristics similar to it, or “GTCC-like.” These two categories essentially straddle the United States’ LLW inventory, for which disposal facilities are in operation, and high-level nuclear waste (HLW) inventory, for which no disposal capability exists. GTCC nuclear waste is produced by multiple sources: commercial nuclear power plants, medical procedures, industrial and research activities, and Department of Energy (DOE) missions, including those related to national security and the cleanup of legacy facilities. These activities carry with them an ethical responsibility to dispose of the nuclear waste they generate rather than pass it on to the next generation. Security task forces have also identified the lack of a disposal pathway for sealed sources of GTCC nuclear waste as a concern, given the potential for its theft and use in a dispersal device. This report, part of a series of publications on nuclear waste policy at the Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University SIPA, explores the history of DOE, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and state efforts to develop disposal capabilities for GTCC and GTCC-like inventories. It explains why this gap merits greater attention from policymakers now and identifies measures Congress, the DOE, and the NRC could take, should they decide to address it. US government efforts to develop disposal capabilities for GTCC waste date back to 1985 when Congress made it a federal responsibility. For a time, disposal in the planned repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, was contemplated. But in the absence of appropriations to move that project forward since 2010, the federal government recently issued planning documents that identify generic commercial LLW disposal facilities and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) deep geologic repository in New Mexico as preferred alternatives. Of the commercial LLW disposal facilities in operation, only the WCS facility in Texas has expressed interest in the GTCC disposal mission. The political climate for GTCC disposal in both New Mexico and Texas has darkened in recent years, though, casting doubt on the federal government’s plans. If the US government decides to prioritize the goal of establishing disposal capability for GTCC and GTCC-like nuclear waste, Congress, the DOE, and the NRC could take the following steps to help realize it in the near term.
Topic:
Regulation, Nuclear Waste, Nuclear Energy, and Energy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America