A Comprehensive Exploration of Energy Security: Evolution, Conceptual Frameworks, and Mitigation Strategies

The concept of energy security has undergone significant evolution since its classical origins in the aftermath of the 1970s oil crises. Initially focused primarily on the stable supply of cheap oil, the field has broadened considerably to encompass a diverse array of energy sectors and a wider spectrum of issues. The International Energy Agency (IEA) provides a foundational definition, characterizing energy security as the uninterrupted availability of energy sources at an affordable price. This overarching definition, however, branches into distinct temporal dimensions: long-term and short-term energy security.

Dimensions of Energy Security

Long-term energy security is primarily concerned with ensuring timely investments in the energy sector to align supply with anticipated economic developments and evolving environmental needs. This perspective looks ahead, planning for future demand and ensuring the infrastructure and resources are in place to meet it sustainably.

Conversely, short-term energy security focuses on the immediate responsiveness and adaptability of the energy system. It addresses the system's capacity to react promptly and effectively to sudden, unforeseen changes in the supply-demand balance, such as unexpected disruptions or surges in consumption.

Impacts of Disruptions and Modern System Resilience

Disruptions within energy systems carry the potential for severe consequences, capable of significantly impeding economic and societal development. Given this critical vulnerability, modern energy systems are increasingly required to possess robust resilience, enabling them to withstand shocks originating from a broad spectrum of sources. These threats include, but are not limited to, natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, and novel challenges emerging from the ongoing digitalization of energy systems, which introduces new vectors for cyber threats and systemic vulnerabilities.

Interdependencies and Emerging Threats to Energy Security

The energy sector is confronted by a multitude of threats, many of which are exacerbated by climate change. Extreme weather events, such as severe storms, heatwaves, or prolonged droughts, pose direct physical risks to energy infrastructure, from power plants to transmission lines. Furthermore, increasing stress on global water resources presents a significant challenge, given the deep interdependencies between energy and water systems.

The Energy-Water Nexus

The relationship between energy and water is set to intensify in the coming years, making the management of these linkages pivotal for achieving various development and climate goals. Water is an indispensable resource across virtually all phases of energy generation. This includes the extraction and production of fossil fuels, the cultivation and processing of biofuels, and critically, the operation of power plants, many of which rely on vast quantities of water for cooling. Therefore, ensuring the security of water resources is intrinsically linked to ensuring energy security, and vice-versa.

Conceptualizing Energy Security: Beyond Classic Definitions

As an instance of security in general, any robust concept of energy security must address three fundamental questions:

Security for whom?
Security for which values?
Security from what threats?

A crucial distinction exists between contemporary and 'classic' energy security studies. In the 1970s and 1980s, the discourse around energy security was largely confined to ensuring a stable supply of cheap oil, primarily in response to threats of embargoes and price manipulations by oil-exporting nations (Colglazier and Deese, 1983; Yergin, 1988). However, contemporary energy security challenges have expanded significantly beyond mere oil supplies, encompassing a much broader array of issues (Yergin, 2006). Moreover, modern energy security is now intricately entangled with other critical energy policy problems, such as the imperative to provide equitable access to modern energy services and the urgent need to mitigate climate change (Goldthau, 2011).

The "Four As of Energy Security" and Their Limitations

Over the past five years, numerous publications in Energy Policy have discussed the "four As of energy security": availability, accessibility, affordability, and acceptability. These concepts were initially introduced by the Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre (APERC, 2007) and have gained considerable traction in the discourse.

Critique: "Security for Whom?" - The Referent Object

The question "Security for whom?" is paramount in any security analysis. Prominent security scholars like Baldwin and Barry Buzan emphasize that a concept of security that fails to specify its referent object "makes little sense" (Baldwin, 1997). In Buzan's terminology, the referent object is the entity for which security is sought, typically the state, but potentially other entities as well (Buzan et al., 1998). Buzan further argues that a simple specification like 'the state' or 'the individual' is insufficient, as the security of many states and individuals is interdependent. Therefore, the search for a referent object must be accompanied by an understanding of its necessary conditions.

The "four As" framework notably fails to address or even ask "Security for whom?". It remains unclear for whom energy should be affordable or acceptable. This ambiguity leads to divergent interpretations of concepts like affordability:

APERC (2007) interprets affordability as the profitability of energy investments.
Kruyt et al. (2009) and Hughes (2012) interpret it as low energy prices for consumers.
Sharifuddin (2013) extends affordability to government accounts, considering subsidy levels and import/export balances.

The relevance of these interpretations of affordability to energy security in any given situation is directly contingent on how the question "Security for whom?" is answered. The following table illustrates these different interpretations:

Affordability for whom?	Energy prices should be…
Households and private consumers	Low compared to household income
Industry and businesses	Low compared to competitors’ prices
Nations	Low enough to ensure the energy import bill is small compared to export earnings
Energy companies and investors	High enough to ensure sufficient profitability for energy companies and investors

Critique: "Security for Which Values?" - Protecting Energy Systems

A central question for contemporary energy security studies is to identify and explore the intricate connections between energy systems and important social values. Protecting the values of different nations inherently means protecting the distinct energy systems of those nations, rather than a generic concept of 'energy in general'. This understanding necessitates tailored metrics and policies for enhancing energy security that are specific to national contexts and values. The "four As" are not well-suited for designing such nuanced metrics or informing such policies because they lack clarity regarding the specific values to protect, the particular energy systems to which they apply, and the precise links between the two.

Critique: "Security From What Threats?" - Risks and Resilience

The "four As" framework also lacks specificity concerning threats to energy security. Policies related to public services, including energy, typically focus on either attaining desired standards (e.g., expanding energy access to new areas) or maintaining existing standards through effective means (e.g., unbundling electricity generation and transmission to boost competitiveness). In contrast, energy security policies are fundamentally concerned with safeguarding already attained standards against potential disruptions. Energy security concerns are largely shaped by past experiences of disruptions and current perceptions of risks. Crucially, the concepts of risk and resilience are not explicitly embedded within the "four As" framework and receive no systematic treatment in the related literature. While APERC (2007) mentions geological (availability), geopolitical (accessibility), and economic (affordability) threats, it fails to address resilience or explore other critical vulnerabilities such as aging infrastructure, terrorist attacks, natural events, or the inherent intermittency of renewable energy sources like solar and wind.

A Modern Definition: Low Vulnerability of Vital Energy Systems

New insights in the field, such as those proposed by Jewell et al. (2014), define energy security as the low vulnerability of vital energy systems. This definition directly addresses the central security question of "what to protect?" by introducing the concept of 'vital energy systems'.

Understanding Vital Energy Systems

Vital energy systems are defined as those energy systems—comprising energy resources, technologies, and uses linked together by energy flows—that support critical social functions, which are considered 'acquired values' in security terminology. These systems can be delineated according to specific geographic and sectoral boundaries (Cherp and Jewell, 2013). Examples of vital energy systems include:

Oil supplies essential for military operations (Sagan, 1988).
Critical energy infrastructure (e.g., power grids, pipelines).
Renewable energy sources and their associated infrastructure.
Energy 'services' that underpin daily life and economic activity.
Energy export revenues crucial for national economies.
Biofuel or hydrogen trade within decarbonized energy systems.

The vulnerabilities of these vital energy systems are understood as combinations of their exposure to various risks and their inherent resilience. This framework distinguishes between short-term disruptions, termed 'shocks', and long-term, sustained pressures, referred to as 'stresses'.

Measures to Enhance Energy Security

Strategies to enhance energy security can be broadly categorized into long-term and short-term measures, each addressing different aspects of vulnerability and resilience.

Long-Term Energy Security Measures

Long-term measures primarily aim to reduce systemic dependencies and build enduring resilience. These include:

Reducing dependence on any single source of imported energy: Diversifying the energy mix to avoid over-reliance on one type of fuel.
Increasing the number of suppliers: Sourcing energy from a wider range of countries or regions to mitigate geopolitical risks associated with a single supplier.
Exploiting native fossil fuel or renewable energy resources: Developing domestic energy production capabilities to reduce import dependency.
Reducing overall demand through energy conservation measures: Implementing policies and technologies that improve energy efficiency and reduce consumption.
Entering into international agreements: Establishing treaties and frameworks, such as the Energy Charter Treaty in Europe, to underpin stable international energy trading relationships and ensure security of transit.

These long-term strategies are crucial for mitigating future costs associated with importing and exporting fuels, reducing vulnerability to supply disruptions, and fostering greater national energy autonomy. For instance, Sweden has opted to block the development of natural gas imports, instead prioritizing greater investment in native renewable energy technologies and energy conservation. India is actively pursuing a major domestic oil exploration program to lessen its reliance on OPEC. Iceland stands as a leading example, with advanced plans to achieve 100% energy independence by 2050 through the exclusive deployment of renewable energy sources.

Short-Term Energy Security Measures

Short-term measures focus on immediate responses to sudden supply disruptions or demand surges, ensuring the system's ability to react promptly.

Petroleum

Many countries maintain strategic petroleum reserves as a critical buffer against the economic and political fallout of an energy crisis. A prime example is the International Energy Agency (IEA), whose 31 member countries are mandated to hold a minimum of 90 days of their net oil imports in reserve. These nations are also committed to enacting legislation to develop comprehensive emergency response plans to address oil supply shocks and other immediate threats to energy security.

Natural Gas

Reliance on imported natural gas introduces significant short-term vulnerabilities. A major challenge for natural gas providers currently revolves around the complexities of storing and transporting this fuel, which can be difficult to manage in rapid response scenarios.

Nuclear Power

Nuclear power offers a distinct profile in terms of short-term energy security. Uranium, the fuel for nuclear reactors, is mined and enriched in a diverse array of politically "stable" countries. In 2007, major producers included Canada (23% of world total), Australia (21%), and Kazakhstan (16%), alongside more than ten other nations. Crucially, nuclear fuel is manufactured significantly in advance of its need, providing a substantial buffer. Many consider nuclear fuel a relatively reliable power source, being more abundant in the Earth's crust than tin, mercury, or silver. Furthermore, nuclear power contributes to reducing carbon emissions. Despite its viability, nuclear power remains controversial due to associated risks, such as accidents and waste disposal, and public opposition often manifests as a "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) sentiment regarding plant construction or waste storage. Currently, nuclear power accounts for approximately 13% of the world's total electricity generation.

Renewable Energy

The increasing integration of renewable energy sources, while beneficial for long-term sustainability, presents unique short-term challenges, primarily due to their intermittent nature. Unlike traditional fuel-fired turbines that can be "spun up" on demand, or nuclear plants that operate continuously, renewable sources like solar and wind are not always available when needed. The electrical grid itself does not store energy; it only distributes electricity on demand. This necessitates the deployment of very large-scale energy storage solutions, such as batteries. For example, solar panels cannot generate electricity at night, so energy captured during the day must be stored for nighttime release. Similarly, wind power fluctuates uncontrollably, requiring storage capacity to smooth out supply variations. Nuclear power, being operational whenever needed, does not require such storage capacity. Essentially, any method of power generation that cannot function 24/7, or that generates more electricity than is immediately consumed, requires battery storage to collect and provide a controlled release of electricity.

It is important to distinguish between renewable energy and clean energy. Renewable energy sources include solar, geothermal, hydro-electric, biofuels (optimally crude oil from algae and ethanol from switchgrass), and wind power. Clean energy encompasses all these renewable methods but also includes nuclear power. While nuclear power is clean in terms of emissions, its resources (like coal, oil, and natural gas) are finite and not quickly renewable, thus differentiating it from truly renewable sources.