Don’t bet on a losing horse

Historian Adam Tooze has described our age as one defined by polycrisis: disparate yet interconnected global shocks that threaten social and natural systems from various directions.

One of these shocks, of course, is the climate catastrophe. Scientists’ best predictions of next year’s El Niño show that 2027 will most likely be the warmest year on record, at a whopping 1.6 to 1.7 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. Another is the ongoing energy crisis caused by the United States’ attack on Iran and the latter’s subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz. About 20% of world fossil fuel production, and much of its derivatives, are functionally offline and will continue being so for several months at the very least.

A related piece of news from last week is that one of The Netherlands’ climate movement leaders, Milieudefensie’s Director Donald Pols, will soon take on a new job: Chief Sustainability Officer for Tata Steel (in Dutch), one of the country’s biggest polluters. This has triggered another episode in the eternal debate we keep seeing on our own campus every year. Those who protest against great polluters expanding their influence at TU Delft are met with the same tired refrain: you may not like it, but we need them for the energy transition! Demanding change from the outside is worthless compared to bringing about change from the inside!

Normally, I would be writing to disprove these arguments. I’d try to prove that, if these companies were really serious about the energy transition, we’d see it in their records of behaviour and investment, not in some half-baked greenwashing about algae. I’d try to explain how individual choices are irrelevant when the company’s profit motive can only be satisfied through continued extraction. Even if Shell had a sustainability-minded CEO, they would just be replaced if their decisions reduced profits for shareholders.

Working within the logic of this system is simply a losing bet

But I don’t have to do that. Just like four years ago, the world is now reeling from an energy crisis fundamentally caused by the unreliability of fossil fuels. Import dependence and price volatility are locked in and baked into the logic of the fossil fuel economy. As recent events have repeatedly proven, working within the logic of this system is simply a losing bet.

There is a better way. As members of the academic community, we can stop facilitating our countries’ reliance on a motley crew of fossil-powered oligarchies for our energy supply. We can stop giving this system legitimacy through our engagement with fossil fuel companies – which, frankly, will soon disappear anyway because they continue to latch onto an unreliable, inefficient, and environmentally destructive source of energy. We can refuse to be co-opted into these companies’ techniques of predatory delay.

The world has started on an irreversible path. Every wind turbine, every solar panel, every electric vehicle is an oil deposit whose carbon will thankfully never reach the atmosphere. So, whenever you’re thinking about your next place of work, here’s a piece of advice: don’t bet on a losing horse.