Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

The role of the US in the geopolitics of climate policy and stranded oil reserves

Nature Energy volume 1, Article number: 16158 (2016) Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Computer-assisted technological innovation and breakthroughs in drilling are revolutionizing the energy landscape, creating greater uncertainty about the future trends for oil use. These new dynamics are prompting major oil producers to reconsider the commercial value of their assets, potentially changing the long-term outlook for oil prices. A shift in investment and production strategy by major oil-producing countries and large multinational companies to pre-empt the risk of stranded assets would have significant implications on energy markets. This Perspective surveys the competitive forces at play that are able to shift the dynamics of the global oil market and discusses their implications for US climate and energy policy. A declining long-term oil price might imply that energy and climate scientists and policymakers should revisit the road map of the optimum policies to promote the transition to lower carbon energy and to defend technology gains already achieved.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Possible impact of percentage change in VMT on demand for oil, specifically in transportation uses, globally by 2050.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hoffert, M. I. Advanced technology paths to global climate stability: energy for a greenhouse planet. Science 298, 981–987 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458 1158–1163 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Johansson, T. B., Nakicenovic, N., Patwardhan, A. & Gomez-Echeverri, L. (eds) Global Energy Assessment: Toward a Sustainable Future (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012); http://go.nature.com/2cFv6e5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Reiner, D. M. Learning through a portfolio of carbon capture and storage demonstration projects. Nat. Energy 1, 15011 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wade, T. Pioneer says some U. S. fracking costs competitive with Saudis. Reuters (29 July 2016); http://go.nature.com/2dtFAfi

  6. U.S. Energy Intensity Projected to Continue its Steady Decline Through 2040 (US EIA, 2013); http://go.nature.com/2dmaXYB

  7. Seba, T. Clean Disruption of Energy and Transportation (Clean Planet Ventures, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  8. McGlade, C. & Ekins, P. The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 517, 187–190 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Griffin, P. et al. Science and the stock market: investors’ recognition of unburnable carbon. Energy Econ. 52, 1–12 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Deffeyes, K. Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage (Princeton Univ. Press, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Clayton, B. C. Market Madness: A Century of Oil Panics, Crises, and Crashes (Oxford Univ. Press, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gately, D. OPEC's incentives for faster output growth. Energy J. 25, 75–96 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Neff, S. & Coleman, M. EIA outlook: reversal in U.S. oil import dependency. Energy Strategy Rev. 5, 6–13 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. World Energy Outlook (International Energy Agency, 2015).

  15. Energy Perspectives 2016 (Statoil, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2dl6Cc8

  16. BP Technology Outlook (BP, 2015); http://go.nature.com/2d3xGLb

  17. Darby, M. Total rules out Arctic oil drilling, citing 2C goal. Climate Home (24 May 2016); http://go.nature.com/2d0mp0G

  18. Carbon Scenarios (ConocoPhillips, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2dwgEXh

  19. Nykvist, B. Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 329–332 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. ExxonMobil's Outlook for Energy Sees Global Increase in Future Demand (ExxonMobil, 2014); http://go.nature.com/2cwnpDp

  21. Wadud, Z., MacKenzie, D. & Leiby, P. Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles. Transport. Res. A 86, 1–18 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Brown, A., Gonder, J. & Repac, B. in Lecture Notes in Mobility (eds Meyer, G. & Beiker, S. ) 137–153 (Springer, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Martin, E. W. & Shaheen, S. A. Greenhouse gas emission impacts of carsharing in North America. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Systems 12, 1074–1086 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Engaging on Climate Change (ExxonMobil, 2014); http://go.nature.com/2dtHM6m

  25. Andrei, M. All of China's buses might be electric by 2025. ZME Science (19 January 2016); http://go.nature.com/2cPQef1

  26. King, D. Sweden testing electric trucks on wired roads. Autoblog (23 June 2016); http://go.nature.com/2cWXdVJ

  27. EPA and DOT Finalize Greenhouse Gas and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Heavy-Duty Trucks (US EPA, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2cFwjSj

  28. Eaton, C. Saudi oil minister: production cuts are not going to happen. FuelFix (23 February 2016); http://go.nature.com/2ddf48o

  29. Micklethwait, J., Carey, G., Shahine, A. & Martin, M. Saudi Arabia plans $2 billion megafund for post oil era: Deputy Crown Prince. Bloomberg News (1 April 2016); http://go.nature.com/2ddf3RR

  30. Chan, P. & Sircar, R. Fracking, Renewables and Mean Field Games (SSRN, 2015); http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2632504

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Dlouhy, J. A. Big oil abandons $2.5 billion in U.S. Arctic drilling rights. Bloomberg News (9 May 2016); http://go.nature.com/2daYFDE

  32. Miyagiwa, K. & Ohno, Y. Oil and Strategic Development of Substitute Technology Working Paper (James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, 2000); http://go.nature.com/2cyc5eS

  33. Krauss, C. Low energy prices offer opening for subsidy cuts. The New York Times (3 February 2015); http://go.nature.com/2dmbp99

  34. Brown, S. P. & Yucel, M. The Shale Gas and Tight Oil Boom: U.S. States Economic Gains and Vulnerabilities (Council on Foreign Relations, 2013).

  35. Medlock, K., Jaffe, A. M. & O'sullivan, M. The global gas market, LNG exports and the shifting U.S. geopolitical presence. Energy Strategy Rev. 5, 14–25 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jaffe, A. M. & Soligo, R. in Energy Security and Global Politics (eds Moran, D. & Russell, J. A. ) 112–134 (Routledge, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jaffe, A. M. Introduction to Energy Strategy Reviews volume “US energy independence: present and emerging issues”. Energy Strategy Rev. 5, 1–3 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jaffe, A. M. & Elass, J. War and the oil price cycle. J. Int. Aff. 69, 121–137 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Randall, T. Here's how electric cars will cause the next oil crisis. Bloomberg Energy Finance (25 February 2016); http://go.nature.com/2d0naXF

  40. Scheitrum, D., Jaffe, A. M. & Fulton, L. Changing oil market fundamentals and the implications for OPEC production strategy. IAEE Energy Forum 15–16 (Bergen Special Issue 2016); http://go.nature.com/2daZjku

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, 1605 Tilia Street, Suite 100, Davis, 95616, California, USA

    Amy Myers Jaffe

Authors
  1. Amy Myers Jaffe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy Myers Jaffe.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author is a senior advisor to the Office of the Chief Investment Officer of the University of California.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jaffe, A. The role of the US in the geopolitics of climate policy and stranded oil reserves. Nat Energy 1, 16158 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2016.158

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2016.158

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing