The adoption of fossil fuels as a primary means of heating and fuel for combustion machines is doubtless one of the most important elements of the modern standard of living. As early as 1776, Adam Smith (writing even before the steam engine gained wide usage) considered coal to be an irreplaceable part of the growing manufacturing economy:
“The price of fuel has so important an influence upon that of labour, that all over Great Britain, manufactures have confined themselves principally to the coal counties; other parts of the country, on account of the high price of this necessary article, not being able to work so cheap. In some manufactures, besides, coal is a necessary instrument of trade; as in those of glass, iron, and all other metals”
Coal’s position as the chief fuel for heating has, thankfully, been replaced by the somewhat cleaner natural gas, but the foundational role played by fossil fuels in modern economies has so far stubbornly remained. I’ve written before that this has a pernicious effect on Liberalism generally, as it places more importance on raw materials whose supply can be monopolized, while reducing the importance of specialized labor, whose efforts tend to flourish especially in liberal regimes.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has both thrust this issue into the spotlight and created a natural experiment in alternatives. The continuation of the war is possible only because of global demand for fossil fuels, a key crowbar in Russia’s geopolitical toolbox as well as the cornerstone to their fiscal position. However, it is also showing the limitations of fossil fuel as a weapon. Europe especially is showing - however slowly - that it is possible to dramatically reduce a modern economy’s reliance on fossil fuels.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Apply Liberally to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.