In a highly competitive and dynamic world, setting goals and priorities is increasingly critical. In times of crisis, these tools are even more important. We are experiencing an energy war that is causing a new arrangement in the geopolitics of energy and in the geoeconomy in the world, and we need to make decisions even if, in the short term, they are apparently contrary to what we want for the future.

When it comes to energy, these incompatibilities are evident both in political discourses and in the day-to-day life of the ordinary citizen. We want to decarbonise the economy as quickly as possible to reduce the effects of climate change. At the same time, we want the lowest possible prices of gasoline, diesel and natural gas. And we are not willing to make any gesture to reduce energy demand, especially consumers in developed countries.

We want "petrodictators" to be eliminated, for renewable sources to be predominant and for no new investments in fossil fuels to be made. But we do not understand that reducing fossil supply leads to more expensive energy and, consequently, to higher inflation rates. This ends up forcing the Central Banks to raise interest rates, causing an economic downturn. Reduce fossil fuel taxes to contain rising prices, no way, because it is interpreted as subsidy.

In the crisis, magical thoughts cannot be goals, let alone priorities. No one wants to go back to the 18th century, when coal was the main source of energy. But we also can't think that in Brazil everyone will drive Tesla cars, being major producers of biofuels. The way is to build energetic arrays that take advantage of the attributes of each source. And that includes fossil fuels, such as natural gas and nuclear power.

It is possible to produce energy in the cleanest way, invest in carbon sequestration and ensure that any new pipeline or pipeline is compatible with hydrogen transport, which will likely be clean fuel for the next decade. But for that to happen, we need to set goals and priorities that are compatible with the reality of the current energy market.

Energy transitions are time-consuming and this is nothing new. We've already had the transition from firewood to coal and coal to oil. The big difference is that the current transition will not be made taking into account only economic aspects. This time, it is mandatory to look at the climatic aspects, which makes the movement more complex. Brazil can become a reference for the world. We have a diversity of primary energy sources, and using that advantage, having goals and priorities, is the challenge of the new government.

Source: udop