Thune: Energy Security is National Security

Press Release

"Mr. President, recent events -- notably Putin's war of aggression in Ukraine and Hamas' deadly October 7 attack on Israel -- have thrown the importance of national security into sharp relief.

At its most basic level, of course, national security means having a strong military -- a fighting force that can meet and defeat any threat it's called upon to face.

But there are other key components of national security as well.

There's border security.

There's economic security.

And there's energy security.

What do I mean by energy security, Mr. President?

I mean a strong and stable energy supply that does not depend on imports from hostile countries or unstable regions of the world.

You only have to look at the soaring costs and supply challenges countries like Germany have faced in the wake of Russia's attack on Ukraine to realize that relying on energy from other countries -- particularly hostile countries -- can leave a country in a deeply vulnerable position.

Mr. President, the United States had been doing a good job of maintaining our energy security.

We developed domestic resources, both renewable and conventional, which meant that we were able to minimize our reliance on other countries.

But President Biden upended that trajectory with his singular focus on Green New Deal policies.

And now we're at an inflection point, Mr. President.

President Biden's energy policies have put us on a dangerous trajectory -- one that could easily result in significant disruptions to our domestic supply.

For starters, there's the president's notable hostility to conventional energy production.

Since the day he took office, President Biden has pursued an agenda that is hostile to conventional sources of energy -- namely, oil and natural gas.

He set the tone on his first day in office when he canceled the Keystone XL pipeline -- a pipeline project that was already underway and that was to be paired with $1.7 billion in private investment in renewable energy to fully offset its operating emissions.

He also almost immediately froze new oil and gas leases on federal lands -- sending a clear signal to oil and gas producers that his administration would be reluctant to work with them to increase American energy production.

And he's continued along the same lines ever since -- with a recent notable example being his cancellation of seven oil and gas leases in the small portion of ANWR -- the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge -- that is available for energy exploration and development.

The problem with the president's actions, of course, is that our nation is nowhere near being able to end our reliance on conventional energy.

I am a big -- and longtime -- supporter of renewable energy, but we are simply not in a position yet where we can rely predominantly on alternative energy technologies.

The president himself admitted as much in his most recent State of the Union address, but that hasn't stopped him from pursuing policies that seem designed to eventually force our nation to rely on other countries for oil and gas -- with all the attendant security and economic risks that brings.

And the president's energy agenda isn't limited to canceling oil and gas leases, or discouraging investment in conventional energy production.

Also of deep concern is the president's apparent determination to force Americans to adopt electric vehicles on a broad scale within the next decade.

And why is this so concerning?

Because our electric grid is nowhere near capable of supporting that kind of a widespread transition to electric vehicles.

Rising electricity demand is already stretching our grid, which has been weakened by the move away from conventional energy sources.

In February the PJM Interconnection -- which manages a substantial part of eastern America's electric grid -- warned that fossil fuel plants are being forced to retire at a faster rate than new renewables can be brought on line, at a rate of roughly two to one.

In other words, Mr. President, we're rapidly approaching a situation in which we simply don't have the ability to keep up with current electricity demand.

Add charging for tens of thousands -- or hundreds of thousands -- of electric vehicles on top of that, and we could be looking at a future of widespread blackouts and brownouts -- to say nothing of soaring electricity prices.

And it goes without saying that a nation that can't reliably keep its lights on or its homes heated is a nation that is less than secure.

To make matters worse, the Biden administration has proposed a rule that would severely constrain the supply chain for distribution transformers -- a critical component of America's electric grid.

Stakeholders are already facing significant backlogs for these critical components, whether they are trying to recover from a storm, improve the grid, or tie in new development.

And the Biden administration's proposed rule would guarantee that these problems would get worse.

Mr. President, recent events remind us that we can't take our nation's security for granted.

We have to work constantly to maintain our nation's strength -- both to ensure that we are always prepared to meet any threat, and because being strong is the best way to discourage any threat.

And energy security is an essential part of maintaining that strength.

And if we want to maintain our energy security -- if we want to maintain the kind of energy supply that can not only deal with all domestic energy demands but will leave us free from overreliance on other countries -- we can't keep heading down the path the Biden administration has put us on.

I hope the president and his allies will realize this before it's too late.

Mr. President, I yield the floor."

Source