This chapter analyzes the interconnections between energy policy and security and defense policies in Estonia with respect to energy transition. After explaining the key characteristics of energy and security regimes, it examines administrative interaction and policy coherence. The interconnections pertaining to energy transitions and security are visible via three cases: the oil shale phaseout and stability of Ida-Viru County, wind power expansion and the defense radar operation, and the desynchronization of the electricity network from Russia. Russia has formed the prevalent landscape pressure on the energy regime, although other landscape pressures have been noted, for example, climate change. Administrative coordination between energy and security has often relied on informal means, which are employed for agility but lack transparency. The security implications of the expanding energy “niches,” such as solar and wind power, have been little covered, although this has clearly increased via newly emerging attention on critical materials.

This chapter analyzes the interconnections between energy, security, and defense policies from a transition perspective in Finland. It explains the key characteristics of Finland’s energy and security regimes, and then examines administrative interaction and policy interplay. The interconnections are visible via three cases: expansion of wind power and the operation of air surveillance radars, framing of peat as a security question, and how the Finnish government addressed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Policy coherence between energy and security was limited before 2022, mainly focusing on stockpiling fuels and mitigating direct risks to the electricity network, for example, collaboration via the “Power Pool.” Geopolitical discussion pertaining to Russia was avoided in energy policy discussions. Energy policy integration into security and defense policy has occurred on a general level, for example, energy is now seen as a critical infrastructure and the energy efficiency of defense premises has been improved. Recent events show the need for improved coherence and collaboration.

The top priority in addressing climate change is to reduce net emissions of greenhouse gases to zero as swiftly as possible. Among the policy instruments for achieving this goal: carbon markets and carbon taxes; subsidies and incentives for energy conservation and for developing renewable energy technologies; building a new network of advanced nuclear reactors to provide carbon-free energy; imposing restraints on deforestation and planting large numbers of new trees; developing powerful new technologies for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere; incentivizing private citizens to reduce the carbon footprint of their lifestyles; and introducing new governmental policies for decarbonizing national economies. By combining all these strategies, humankind could realistically reach net zero emissions by the middle years of this century. From that point forward, it can start actively removing existing accumulations of carbon dioxide, eventually bringing global warming to a halt and reversing some of the damage that’s already been done.

This is the first of two chapters that focus on mitigation or emissions reduction. Chapter 6 addresses the primary cause of climate change, which is the emission of CO2 that derives from the combustion of fossil fuels. We review the oppositional forces of exploration and consumption in respect of fossil fuel reserves and the concepts of peak oil, gas, and coal. We turn next to the carbon cycle and how it is altered by widespread fossil fuel combustion. The low hanging fruit in mitigation is to electrify everything within reason and to simultaneously decarbonize our electrical supply. However, grid limitations, scant electrical storage capacity, and the intermittent nature of wind and solar combine to make deep decarbonization a more difficult challenge than is often appreciated. These factors along with the distinct consideration of national energy security help explain why fossil fuels are likely to persist late into this century as a source of dispatchable electric power. Finally, there are economic sectors such as aviation and steel making that lend themselves poorly to electrification and will likely remain recalcitrant sectors.

Chapter 1 introduces the basic patterns in mid-nineteenth-century Mexico’s energy regime. After a brief overview of Mexico’s longer history, it presents a panoramic view of Mexican society in the 1850s and analyzes the relationship between economic activity, environmental conditions, and the country’s energy regime, which depended on the annual solar cycle. It sketches the basic contours of Mexico’s pre–fossil fuel era, providing a baseline against which the social, economic, and environmental developments examined in subsequent chapters can be gauged.

Early adopters of wind and solar power often chose these forms of electricity becasue they have few greenhouse gas emissions. This chapter suggests that a climate framing of electricity choices is threatening to incumbent fossil fuel sources of electricity as it implies that they must be curtailed to meet climate ambitions. The chapter has a theoretical focus on state capacity: in the positive sense that states must be able to plan for long-term interests like climate change and in the negative sense that states must be able to take on powerful actors for whom such action is an existential threat. This policy arena separates the two cases. South Africa has depended on coal-powered electricity provided by a powerful state-owned enterprise, Eskom, and built strong economic sectors around it. These fought hard against adopting wind and solar power; further headwinds came from the government’s corrupt preference for nuclear power. In contrast, given its hydropower, Brazilian climate politics was heated over deforestation, not electricity choices. Wind, but not solar power, was unproblematically added to annual electricity planning – a decision that defies the climate lens.