Evaluating the Energy Security Implications of a Carbon-Constrained U.S. Economy

In this paper, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the World Resources Institute examine eight scenarios for technological development and energy use in the United States in 2035. All envision limiting the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) to 450 parts per million (ppm).

Applying an Energy Security Lens

The authors then assess how each scenario affects 11 factors closely associated with energy security:

• diversity of energy sources;
• diversity of suppliers;
• import levels;
• security of trade flows;
• geopolitics and economics;
• reliability;
• risk of nuclear proliferation;
• market/price volatility;
• affordability;
• energy intensity (energy used per unit of gross domestic
  product); and
• feasibility.

Lessons Learned

This approach, which we think of as envisioning carbon-constrained futures through an “Energy Security Lens,” produced a number of insights that could inform U.S. policymakers as
they consider technologies to address energy, climate, and economic priorities:

• Regardless of fuel and technology choices, some level of
  energy insecurity is inevitable, especially in the near term, as
  the United States transitions to a low-carbon energy system.
  Policymakers should explore ways to mitigate this insecurity
  during the transition.
• Meeting GHG reduction goals will be more costly with only
  today’s technologies than with high penetration of more advanced
  low-carbon energy technologies. Policymakers should
  provide the sustained financial and institutional support
  necessary to advance all available low-carbon technologies,
  which can reduce costs and increase energy security over
  the longer term. This will provide the best chance for the
  emergence of a variety of technology options and quicken
  the transition to a secure low-carbon energy system.
• Global—not just domestic—deployment of advanced lowcarbon
  energy technologies can minimize the costs and
  energy security risks of achieving climate change goals. The
  U.S. should support the adoption of advanced low-carbon
  technologies both at home and abroad.
• Common notions of “feasibility” (economic, technical, commercial, political) must be stretched. Policymakers should
  prepare the public to accept higher energy prices while making
  significant investments in low-carbon energy technologies
  and infrastructure. Clearly, such investments are necessary
  to ensure that viable alternatives are available when they are
  needed. However, energy and economic security concerns
  make it equally important that policymakers not take overly
  aggressive action that could jeopardize the existing fuel
  system until these alternatives can be deployed at scale.
• A non-carbon-constrained energy future also raises questions
  of feasibility and significant energy security concerns.
  A low-carbon future with advanced technology development,
  however, offers significant commercial and energy security
  benefits.