The Biden administration’s aggressive push for a transition to alternative green energy sources would leave the U.S. military more dependent on arch-enemy China, with dire consequences in the event of war with China, according to a study released Thursday by the Heritage Foundation and first obtained by Breitbart News.
The study, titled “China Handcuffs: Making the U.S. Military Not Dependent on Chinese Green Energy,” is the second in a series examining the dangers of China’s over-reliance on renewable energy and its “misguided” environmental policies.
Key takeaways from the study, written by Brent Sadler, senior fellow for Naval Warfare and Advanced Technology at the Heritage Foundation, include:
— High reliance on foreign sources, poor policy choices, and limited fuel transportation could leave U.S. forces vulnerable to potential regional fuel shortages and Chinese economic pressure.
In the event of a war in which China could use any means possible, including cyberattacks, to slow or cut off fuel shipments within the United States, the location of the Federal Strategic Petroleum Reserve could be cut off from where fuel is needed most.
— American industry must be freed from the interference of environmental, social and governance (ESG) special interests, and the U.S. government must loosen the stranglehold on American shipping imposed by the Jones Act and begin the process of improving energy security.
The study’s key recommendations include rethinking the role and management of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, restructuring and building America’s oil refineries, tapping into vast domestic energy reserves, and strengthening energy trade relationships with allies to ensure that our military has safe and readily available energy for a protracted war.
Sadler said the U.S. military will likely use ships, aircraft and combat vehicles that rely on fossil fuels for the foreseeable future. For example, he said, the U.S. military still relies heavily on civilian aircraft carriers, which rely on conventional fuels for more than 90 percent of their energy needs, to transport personnel and critical repair parts.
“For reference, in 2018, commercial airlines transported 90 percent of military personnel and 40 percent of supplies,” he wrote, adding that “without sufficient fuel, the U.S. economy would slow significantly, with dire consequences for military operations that depend on the functioning of domestic industries and logistics networks.”
“This problem would be particularly acute in the event of a protracted war with China,” he wrote.
Related: A green energy nightmare — Texas wind turbines burst into flames after being struck by lightning
Brent Havins (via Storyful)
Sadler called for careful policymaking and investments to ensure the United States can continue long-term military operations, especially if overseas energy markets and conventional transportation routes are disrupted.
“Under these circumstances, the United States will need more diverse and reliable overseas suppliers for its military operations. Given the global impact of a war with China, the United States urgently needs to secure sufficient fuel and crude oil reserves to have time to adjust to a war footing,” he wrote.
He recommended revamping existing refineries or building new ones to meet wartime needs that could not be sourced overseas, but warned that would take years.
He also recommended updating the role of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which was established by Congress in 1975 to cushion energy shocks and is required to hold a 90-day supply of non-wartime crude oil.
“The SPR and U.S. crude oil refining capacity alone are not enough to minimize risks to the availability and transportation of U.S. fuel. Steps are needed to ensure that sufficient crude oil is available, can be refined at the rate required for a wartime economy and military, and has the capacity to move that fuel where it is needed,” he wrote.
He added that a “tendency to use the SPR for political purposes” has exacerbated the situation: “President Joe Biden’s decision to use the SPR in 2022, releasing 180 million barrels ahead of the midterm elections, has caused inventories to fall by nearly a third in an attempt to lower gasoline prices,” he wrote.
“As of January 5, 2024, there are 355 million barrels of crude oil stored in the SPR. This is the lowest total since 1983, putting the energy security of the American people at risk,” he wrote.
RELATED: Republican Senator Thune: Biden’s energy policy is intended to ‘push people off fuel-based vehicles’
“The SPR should be managed in a way that allows the United States to respond to a protracted military crisis with limited access to overseas energy markets. This will require a change in political posture and new legislation,” he recommended.
Sadler also called for the repeal of “self-defeating rules and laws,” as well as the repeal of “ESG warriors” and the Jones Act, which requires that cargo moving between US ports must be on US-owned, US-built ships, with a majority of its crew members being US citizens.
He said U.S. financial institutions are increasingly under pressure from progressive interest groups to adopt ESG policies, such as net-zero emissions policies.
This pressure has led to a decline in investment in relatively clean, reliable, and affordable U.S. energy production in favor of “clean” renewable energy. Indeed, China has near-control of much of the renewable energy market, including markets for battery production, solar cell manufacturing, and wind turbine construction. ESG also impacts companies located in overseas treaty allies, posing a potential disaster that weakens U.S. foreign and national security policies. ESG policies increase U.S. dependency on China for renewable energy, undermining U.S. attempts at energy independence and weakening U.S. economic resilience. These factors combine to expose the U.S. to Chinese economic pressure.
Sadler wrote that the Jones Act “fails to fulfill its mission of ensuring a minimum number of domestic and merchant mariners to support the nation in war” and “has not worked for years.”
“Too many ships that comply with the Jones Act and can transport fuels such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) require exemptions for foreign vessels. This exacerbates a fundamental mismatch between the amount of fuel the United States needs and getting it to where it needs to be to fight and win a war against China. The recommended approach is to allow allied vessels to more readily participate in this domestic energy transportation while focusing on restoring U.S. maritime competitiveness and rebuilding domestic maritime capabilities,” he wrote.
He recommended that the United States strengthen its energy trade ties with allies and partners, and that treaty allies such as Japan, the Philippines and South Korea should be exempt from Jones Act regulations.
He said the president should “refocus diplomacy and economic efforts from a short-sighted ESG and climate change agenda to one that supports energy resilience. Countries in Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia are rich sources of fast-growing energy resources but are vulnerable to investment from China and Russia, both of which are known to use energy markets as a weapon of political control.”
Joe Biden’s “climate change” policies would end energy independence and lock away trillions of dollars’ worth of natural resources, says Stephen Moore. https://t.co/gwRxv5EE7D
—Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) February 23, 2021
He recommended increased energy trade across North America.
“Canada and Mexico are America’s two largest energy trading partners, but they face unnecessary constraints.
“One way to mitigate this would be to allow cross-border energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL pipeline, which would allow investment to flow more easily and with less red tape to expand domestic port capacity for energy trade,” he wrote.
In conclusion, he writes:
The recommendations in this paper should be common-sense policy even if conflict does not break out. The U.S. energy network is weak in some areas and cannot easily accommodate a surge in demand. In wartime, these weaknesses could result in an inability to continue military operations and for wartime industries to keep the U.S. safe. But preparing for this possibility could be a significant advantage in deterring China as an adversary capable of waging a long war, one supported by a resilient wartime economy and industry. At the same time, a United States that is self-sufficient in its operational energy needs strengthens its overall strategic position vis-à-vis a China that is dependent on foreign fuel imports.
Follow Christina Wong’s “X” at Breitbart News. The truth of society,or Facebook.
