The Shale Revolution and Beyond: Has Turkey Faced the Consequences of US Energy Transition?

Abstract

This article differentiates substantial factors from circumstantial ones in order to map the degree of their significance for Turkey’s energy policy with highlights concerning Turkey’s foreign policy. It primarily focuses on the consequences of US energy transition, in which the shale revolution plays a dominant role, as one of the most significant sources of the substantial change with a direct influence on global energy, Turkey’s energy strategy and, therefore, indirectly on Turkey’s foreign relations. It is not meant to simply identify substantial changes with one independent variable as if they are mere consequences of the US energy transition. The article aims at bringing out the technological, economic and geopolitical features of US energy transition in order to point to their interactions with Turkey’s international relations in general, and Turkey’s energy strategy in particular. This problematic deserves a further, indepth analysis, not only because there is a lack of research on the impact of the US shale revolution and US energy transition in terms of their consequences at the domestic, global and international levels, but also because it may highlight policy options concerning energy strategy and foreign relations in due course

Keywords

• Shale revolution, US energy transition, Turkey, energy policy, foreign policy.

References

1. Turkish Republic Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, (MENR 2010-2014) Strategic Plan, Enerji ve Tabbi Kaynaklar Bakanlığı 2010-2014 Stratejik Planı, at http:// www. enerji.gov.tr/yayinlar_raporlar/ETKB_2010_2014_Stratejik_Plani.pdf (last visited 5 January 2011); Turkish Republic Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, (MENR 2015-2019) Strategic Plan, Enerji ve Tabbi Kaynaklar Bakanlığı 2015-2019 Stratejik Planı, at http://sp.enerji.gov.tr/ETKB_2015_2019_Stratejik_Plani.pdf (last visited 2 April 2017).
2. For this approach, see, Mert Bilgin, “Turkey’s Energy Strategy: Synchronizing Geopolitics and Foreign Policy with Energy Security”, Insight Turkey, Vol. 7, No. 2 (September 2015), pp. 67-81; Mert Bilgin, “Energy and Turkey’s Foreign Policy: The Link between State Strategy, Regional Cooperation and Private Sector Involvement”, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Summer 2010), pp. 81-92; Mert Bilgin, “Geopolitics of European natural gas demand: Supplies from Russia, Caspian and the Middle East”, Energy Policy, Vol. 37, No. 11 (2009), pp. 4482-4491.
3. Ghazale Haddadian and Mohammad Shahidehpour, “Ripple Effects of the Shale Gas Boom in the U.S.: Shift in the Balance of Energy Resources, Technology Deployment, Climate Policies, Energy Markets, Geopolitics and Policy Development”, The Electricity Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2 (March 2015), pp. 17-38.
4. Robert A. Hefner, III, The Grand Energy Transition, New Jersey, Wiley, 2009.
5. Concerning the significance of energy challenge for the USA and Americans, see Sam H. Schurr, Joel Darmstadter, Harry Perry, William C. Ramsay and Milton Russell, Energy in America’s Future: The Choices Before Us, New York, RFF Press, 2011.
6. Sophie Méritet and Fabienne Salaün, “The United States Energy Policy: At a Turning Point”, in Jean-Marie Chevalier (ed.), The New Energy Crisis: Climate, Economics and Geopolitics, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, pp. 173-201.
7. Mert Bilgin, “Energy Transitions, and International Security in the 21st Century”, in Sai Felicia Krishna-Hensel (ed.), New Security Frontiers, Aldershot, Ashgate, 2012, pp. 31- 66.
8. Mert Bilgin, “Energy Policy in Turkey: Security, Markets, Supplies and Pipelines”, Turkish Studies, Vol. 12, No. 3 (2011), pp. 399-417.

9. Mehmet Melikoğlu, “The Role of Renewables and Nuclear Energy in Turkey's Vision 2023 Energy Targets: Economic and Technical Scrutiny”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 62, (September 2016), pp. 1- 12.
10. Zachary Williamson, Deployment of Advanced Energy Technologies, New York, Nova Science, 2009.
11. The use of technology in Turkey’s pipeline projects and its impact upon regional relations may be considered from this perspective. See, Justyna Misiagiewicz, “Oil and Gas Pipeline Infrastructure and its Significance for the International Relations in eastern Europe”, in Monika Szkarłat and Katarzyna Mojska (eds.), New Technologies as a Factor of International Relations, Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016, pp. 412- 422.
12. Patricia Park, International Law for Energy and the Environment, New York, CRC Press, 2013, pp. 131-151.
13. Turkish Republic Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, (MENR 2010-2014) Strategic Plan.
14. Turkish Republic Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, (MENR 2015-2019) Strategic Plan.
15. See, William M. Hale, Turkish Foreign Policy, 1774-2000, London, Frank Cass, 2000; Richard Falk, “Turkish Realignment: Prospects amid Uncertainty”, Foreign Policy Journal, at https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/12/09/turkish- realignment-prospects-amid-uncertainty/ (last visited 12 March 2017).
16. EU Commission, DG ENER, Unit A4, Energy Statistics, Energy datasheets: EU-28 countries, 16 March 2017.
17. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Turkey’s Energy Profile and Strategy, at http://www.mfa.gov. tr/turkeys-energy-strategy.en.mfa, (last visited 27 March 2017).
18. Ibid.; MENR 2015-2019.
19. EU Commission, 2017.
20. Gazprom, Transmission, at http://www.gazprom.com/about/production/transportation/ (last visited 2 April 2017).
21. MENR 2010-2014; MENR 2015-2019. 22 Ibid.
22. Melikoğlu, “The Role of Renewables” , pp. 1–12.
23. Aaron Stein, Turkey’s New Foreign Policy, Whitehall Paper 83, Abingdon, Routledge, 2014.
24. Thierry Bros, After the US Shale Gas Revolution, Paris, Editions Technip, 2012.
25. Sergey S. Zhiltsov and Igor S. Zonn, “Shale Gas Production in the USA”, in Sergey S. Zhiltsov (ed.), Shale Gas: Ecology, Politics, Economy, Cham, Springer International, 2017, pp. 25-36.
26. James G. Speight, Shale Gas Production Processes, Oxford, Gulf Professional Publishing, 2013, p. 6. 28 Ibid, pp. 5-7.
27. Sam Fletcher, “Efforts to Tap Oil Shale’s Potential Yield Mixed Results”, Oil and Gas Journal, (25 April 2005), p. 26.
28. Tyler Hamilton, “A Cheaper Way to Draw Oil from Shale”, MIT Technological Review, at shale/ (last visited 3 March 2017).
29. See Ibid.; James T. Bartis, Tom LaTourrette, Lloyd Dixon, D.J. Peterson and Gary Cecchine, Oil Shale Development in the United States: Prospects and Policy Issues, Santa Monica, RAND, 2005. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid. 34 Ibid.
30. Just like Canadian oil sands, shale industry in the USA is highly vulnerable to environmental regulations. See, API (2017), US Oil Shale: Protecting Our Environment, at Factsheet_2.pdf (last visited 14 March 2017).
31. Bartis, LaTourrette, Dixon, Peterson and Cecchine, Oil Shale Development in the United States.
32. Ira Chernus, Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace, Texas, Texas University Press, 2002; Mary Jo Rogers, Nuclear Energy Leadership: Lessons Learned from U.S. Operators, Oklahoma, PennWell, 2013.
33. This section comprised of a comparative analysis of energy legal frameworks in the USA from 1920 to 2017 has been compiled from US Congress Bill Searches and Lists. It is based on the assumption, as set in the introduction,that these legal frameworks timely respond to actual and expected challenges and goals, and point to the strategic pillars in the US energy strategy. See, US Congress, Bill Searches and Lists, at https://www. congress.gov/ (last visited 15 March 2017).
34. EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency, Overview of the Clean Power Plan (2015), at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/fs-cpp-overview.pdf (last visited 13 March 2017).
35. There emerged a discussion in the US, whether this plan was for or against the state’s rights to develop their own energy plans stemming from their idiosyncratic priorities. See, David B. Rivkin, Jr., Andrew M. Grossman, and Mark W. DeLaquil, “Does EPA’s Clean Power Plan Proposal Violate the States’ Sovereign Rights?”, Engage, Vol.16, No. 1 (February 2015), pp. 36-45.
36. Pacific Research, The Clean Power Plan, at https://www.pacificresearch.org/fileadmin/ images/Studies_2016/CleanPowerPlan_RegressivityReduction_Web.pdf (last visited 25 March 2017).
37. EPA, Laws and Regulations, at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations (last visited 13 March 2017).
38. White House, An America First Energy Plan, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/america- first-energy, (last visited 7 May 2017).