Despite appearances, the world is frighteningly coherent. The extraordinary interdependence of production processes, climate issues and geopolitical balances is apparent at every turn, and nowhere more clearly than in the relationship between oil crises and the organization of our cities. Understanding this means understanding both what makes us vulnerable and what could save us.
The Iranian crisis, which has already led to a significant increase in the price of oil (and there’s more to come), is merely the reproduction of a mechanism of discouraging regularity: we’ve seen it in 1973, 1979, 1990, 2003 and 2011. Each time, a geopolitical crisis leads to a rise in the price of oil; each time, consumer countries complain, express indignation and obtain state aid (i.e. from taxpayers) to cushion the blow. And then they forget about it until the next time.
Yet nothing has been done in earnest to get rid of these fossil fuels: despite the spectacular growth of renewables (the share of solar power has multiplied by 2.5 in five years), fossil fuels still account for 86.6% of the world’s primary energy consumption, and they still cover two-thirds of the growth in global demand, driving CO2 emissions to a new all-time high. Everything has been done to ensure that consumers do not suffer. And even to encourage such production: Direct and indirect global subsidies for fossil fuels amount to 7,000 billion dollars (including over 1,000 billion in direct subsidies), i.e. 7% of global GDP, and more than the annual global expenditure on education. We are therefore massively subsidizing, on a planetary scale, what is killing us.
If, for a significant proportion of the rural population on modest incomes, targeted and temporary public aid must accompany the transition to heat pumps, electric vehicles and decarbonized public transport, we can and must move much faster in the cities: they concentrate more than half the world’s population, generate around 80% of global GDP, are responsible for almost 70% of global CO2 emissions, mainly for heating and mobility, and could all do without fossil fuels entirely.
So, if we want to stop suffering from the inevitable rise in oil and gas prices, we have to get out. And admit that, just as the rise in the price of tobacco has helped to reduce its consumption, the rise in the price of oil is good news, as it should push consumers towards electric alternatives, and force the more lucid producer countries, following the example of Saudi Arabia, to diversify their sources of income.
This is no utopia; giving in to oil demagoguery is not inevitable. And some cities are showing that this radical changeover is not only possible, but economically profitable: Copenhagen in particular is a textbook case that every candidate in a municipal election should learn from: its district heating network, considered the most efficient in the world, now supplies 98% of the city’s homes with waste heat from cogeneration plants and waste incineration plants; moreover, half of its inhabitants and those in its suburbs travel by bicycle every day, thanks to cycle highways linking the suburbs to the city center and bridges exclusively dedicated to cycles; and electric buses and electric cabs have become the norm. Other cities deserve to be cited as examples: Oslo has become the world capital of electric cars per capita, and internal combustion engine cars are banned from the city center; Amsterdam is massively developing heat pumps and geothermal heat networks; and finally, Shenzhen, which converted its entire bus fleet to electric vehicles in 2017.
What’s more, not depending on the infinitely ramifying consequences of the next oil crisis means promoting the life economy, i.e. sustainable energies, local food and unprocessed products, particularly in cities.
That’s why every serious candidate in a municipal election should make the following seven commitments today:
- Massively develop urban heating networks powered by renewable energies.
- Build, with the whole of its conurbation, the infrastructure needed for bicycles and electric public transport.
- Reserve city centers for zero-emission vehicles only.
- Convert fossil fuel subsidies into energy transition incentives and support for the most vulnerable households.
- Develop the use of bio-sourced materials in construction.
- Adopt climate-friendly urban planning, integrating energy-efficient buildings, green roofs, cool islands and rainwater management right from the design stage.
- Exert constant democratic pressure so that national governments stop subsidizing what destroys us and finance what can save us.
And if worse comes to worst, that is, if this local war one day leads to a global conflict, it will be more than wise to have reduced our dependence on what kills us and to have put in place what can protect us from the madness of others.