Balancing Energy Transition and Public Health: A Critical Analysis of Global Energy Policies and Future Challenges

The global energy transition represents one of the most critical challenges of the 21st century, as nations strive to balance environmental sustainability, economic growth and energy security. The urgency of mitigating climate change has accelerated investments in renewable energy, electric mobility and energy-efficient technologies, yet the continued reliance on fossil fuels underscores the complexities of this shift [1]. While renewables such as wind and solar offer cleaner alternatives, they pose challenges related to intermittency, resource dependency and technological scalability, raising concerns about the feasibility of an immediate transition [2]. Furthermore, the transition must account for public health considerations, as energy choices directly impact air quality, occupational safety and broader environmental conditions [3].

Energy policies must navigate these complexities by integrating economic, environmental and social dimensions. The growing emphasis on bioenergy, for example, illustrates the inherent trade-offs between reducing carbon emissions and addressing land use, water consumption and air pollution concerns [4]. Meanwhile, geopolitical factors further complicate the transition, with tensions between global energy organizations and market players influencing fossil fuel production and pricing strategies [5]. Despite advancements in energy technologies, the pace of transition remains uneven across regions, influenced by economic constraints, infrastructure limitations and policy divergences [6]. Achieving a pragmatic balance requires an adaptive policy framework that considers the interdependencies between energy resources, technological innovation and long-term sustainability objectives [7-8]. This paper critically analyzes the global energy transition, addressing the dilemmas of energy policies, geopolitical influences and technological barriers while advocating for a more balanced approach that integrates economic, environmental and public health concerns.

Denmark has significantly increased its reliance on bioenergy, utilizing wood, straw and waste to meet its electricity and heating demands. This shift has been facilitated primarily through the importation of wood from other countries, with bioenergy now accounting for 21% of Denmark’s electricity generation and approximately 11% of its total primary energy consumption [9]. Figure 1 illustrates this trend, highlighting Denmark’s growing dependence on bioenergy sources. A key factor driving this transition is a loophole in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions accounting, which excludes CO2 emissions from burning trees. As a result, this exemption outweighs other environmental concerns, leading to an average Dane burning approximately one tree per year. While burning wood for recreational purposes, such as campfires and smoking food, may evoke a sense of tradition, long-term exposure to wood smoke poses significant health risks. Although 2.3 billion people worldwide continue to rely on biomasswood, dung and sticks-for cooking due to limited alternatives, access to cleaner fuels such as propane would significantly improve air quality and health outcomes.

Figure 1:Denmark energy consumption [12].

However, the increased use of bioenergy in Denmark has led to rising concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in Scandinavian cities, originating from industrial-scale woodburning plants and residential wood stoves. Recent studies indicate that elevated PM2.5 levels can reduce life expectancy in the region [10-11]. Unlike CO₂, which is not classified as a pollutant, PM2.5 is a well-documented health hazard, contributing to approximately three million deaths annually, particularly affecting mothers and children in Sub-Saharan Africa. This raises an important question: Is Denmark, a wealthy nation, regressing by prioritizing CO₂ reduction while neglecting the severe health risks posed by PM2.5 pollution? [12].

Despite global efforts to transition towards renewable energy sources, fossil fuels continue to dominate the energy landscape. In 2024, global carbon emissions have reached record levels, indicating that a substantial shift away from fossil fuel reliance has yet to occur. Although the past decade has seen an increase of 21 Exajoules (EJ) in renewable energy capacity, fossil fuel consumption has grown at twice that rate, increasing by 42 EJ over the same period. This trend underscores the critical role that reliability and cost play in energy consumption patterns [13-14]. While renewable energy sources continue to expand, their intermittent nature and the current limitations of energy storage technologies hinder their ability to fully replace fossil fuels. The affordability and accessibility of fossil fuels, particularly in emerging economies, further reinforce their continued dominance. Without significant advancements in energy storage and infrastructure, the transition to a low-carbon future remains a challenge [15].

A growing divergence exists between the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the International Energy Agency (IEA) regarding the trajectory of global oil production over the coming decades (Figure 2). This disagreement extends beyond short-term production estimates and reflects a broader forecasting dispute over the future of fossil fuels leading up to 2050 [16]. The IEA advocates for an accelerated transition away from fossil fuels, aiming to curb global carbon emissions in alignment with netzero targets. This vision implies limiting fossil fuel consumption before a significant portion of the global population, particularly in developing regions, can fully access high-energy lifestyles comparable to those in developed nations. In contrast, OPEC, along with the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), projects a steady annual increase of nearly one million barrels of oil per day (MMbopd) through 2050. This projection aligns with historical trends, as global oil production has consistently followed a growth trajectory for over five decades.

Figure 2:World daily oil [17].

OPEC’s forecast suggests that per capita oil consumption will see only marginal increases, given that the global population is expected to rise by approximately 1.5 billion people by 2050. To achieve energy equity on par with 2022 consumption levels in Germany or the United States, oil production would need to increase by a factor of 2.5 or even 5.4. While these figures do not represent official forecasts, they illustrate the scale of production necessary for equitable global energy distribution. The question remains: will future energy policies be determined by political pledges favoring decarbonization, or will market-driven demand and energy accessibility dictate the trajectory of oil production? [17]. The recent suspension of natural gas supplies from Russia to Austria underscores the persistent volatility in Europe’s energy landscape. The dispute originated from an arbitration disagreement between Gazprom and Austria’s OMV AG, involving a financial claim of approximately €230 million ($242 million). OMV, in response, withheld payments to Gazprom, leading to the immediate cessation of gas deliveries [18]. This incident is indicative of the broader geopolitical risks associated with European energy security, particularly in the wake of Russia’s strategic use of natural gas as a geopolitical instrument since the 2022 energy crisis.

The European natural gas market responded predictably, with futures prices surging by 2.7% to €47.49 per megawatthour. This price reaction highlights the sensitivity of the European energy market to supply disruptions and the continent’s ongoing struggle to stabilize energy costs [18]. While OMV has reassured stakeholders that alternative supply sources will meet Austria’s energy demand, this episode underscores Europe’s continued dependence on external suppliers despite efforts to diversify its energy portfolio. Europe has made significant strides in reducing its reliance on Russian natural gas by increasing Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) imports and expanding alternative pipeline networks. However, Gazprom’s influence remains potent, as illustrated by its ability to disrupt markets and raise concerns over supply security. This latest dispute serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of Europe’s energy system, particularly as the continent heads into the winter season (Figure 3). The fear of heating shortages and soaring energy bills remains a pressing concern for policymakers and consumers alike. The timing of this dispute is particularly significant given Gazprom’s recent announcement of a 4% increase in its 2024 investment plans, amounting to $16.9 billion. This strategic investment suggests that Russia remains committed to maintaining its role as a dominant energy supplier, despite European efforts to reduce reliance on Russian gas. The spike in European benchmark natural gas prices to their highest levels since November 2023 further underscores the lingering instability in the energy sector [18].

Figure 3:Gas pipelines and LNG carriers [19].

In conclusion, the Austria-Gazprom dispute reinforces the urgent need for Europe to enhance its energy security strategies. While alternative energy sources and interconnected supply networks provide some insulation against disruptions, reliance on volatile suppliers continues to pose significant risks. The situation highlights the necessity for continued investment in diversified energy sources, robust contingency planning and strategic stockpiling to mitigate future supply shocks. As geopolitical tensions persist, Europe must remain vigilant in fortifying its energy resilience to prevent similar disruptions in the future [19].

The ongoing energy transition is not failing due to a lack of commitment or effort but rather because of the inherent complexities of the global energy landscape. A significant portion of the world’s population-approximately 3 billion people-continues to live in energy poverty, seeking reliable and scalable energy sources to meet their fundamental needs. Simultaneously, around 1 billion individuals in energy-rich nations are reluctant to compromise their standard of living by adopting higher-cost and less reliable energy alternatives. This disparity underscores the challenges in achieving a balanced and equitable transition to sustainable energy sources while addressing both economic and social concerns [20]. Recent studies highlight significant material constraints that challenge the feasibility of a future powered predominantly by solar, wind and battery technologies. The extraction requirements for the raw materials essential to solar panels, wind turbines and energy storage systems far exceed current and projected mining capacities. Even under optimal conditions, where these technologies last up to 25 years, the scale of resource demand remains prohibitive (Figure 4).

Figure 4:Minin production [21].

Current global mining production is insufficient to meet the escalating demand for critical minerals such as lithium, copper, graphite and germanium. More concerning is the inadequacy of identified mineral reserves-both mined and unmined-to support the rapid expansion of renewable energy infrastructure. For instance, estimates suggest that extracting the necessary lithium to meet projected 2050 energy demands would take nearly 10,000 years at current production rates. Copper, a vital component in electric motors, turbines and transmission lines, is already flagged as a potential bottleneck, with shortages threatening economic stability across multiple industries. Similarly, the scarcity of graphite and germanium poses challenges to meeting legislative mandates for electric vehicles and grid-scale energy storage. Even an unprecedented 100% recycling efficiency-something historically unattainable in any industry-would fail to bridge this immense supply gap. While the transition to cleaner energy sources remains imperative, evidence suggests that a sustainable future cannot rely exclusively on solar and wind technologies supported by lithium-based batteries. In contrast, nuclear energy emerges as a more viable alternative, offering minimal mining and land use requirements, high energy density and widespread availability. By all practical measures, nuclear energy presents a more sustainable option than intermittent renewable sources [21].

Germany’s ambitious climate policies have led to significant cost increases with minimal reductions in fossil fuel dependency. Despite extensive investments in renewable energy and stringent environmental regulations, the share of fossil fuels in Germany’s total energy consumption has remained unchanged over the past decade. In 2010, fossil fuels accounted for 79.6% of Germany’s total energy mix and by 2023, this figure remained at 79.6% (Figure 5). At the current rate of transition, projections suggest that Germany would only achieve complete decarbonization in approximately 500 years. These findings underscore the challenges associated with large-scale energy transitions, particularly when renewable energy expansion is not matched by corresponding reductions in fossil fuel use. The case of Germany highlights the need for reassessing energy policies to ensure both environmental effectiveness and economic viability [22].

Figure 5:German energy trend [22].

The United States is aiming for a significant expansion in domestic lithium production, with ExxonMobil’s Smackover Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) project leading the way. The initiative seeks to increase U.S. lithium output by a factor of 25, a critical step toward strengthening the domestic critical mineral supply chain and reducing reliance on foreign sources. A major milestone in this effort was achieved with ExxonMobil signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with LG Chem for the potential offtake of up to 100,000 tons of lithium carbonate, a move that is expected to mitigate tariff-related challenges and enhance supply security. Figure 6 illustrates the projected growth in lithium production facilitated by DLE technology. This approach offers a more efficient and environmentally sustainable alternative to conventional lithium extraction methods, making it particularly relevant for the energy transition. As discussions on water management and resource sustainability continue to evolve, DLE is emerging as a promising solution within the broader landscape of upstream oil and gas operations [23].

Figure 6:Map of smack over trend [23].

The selection of Chris Wright as a nominee for U.S. Secretary of Energy has drawn significant attention due to his deep ties to the shale revolution that propelled U.S. oil and gas production to record levels. As the CEO of Liberty Energy, Wright has played a critical role in advancing hydraulic fracturing technology, which involves injecting water and sand into underground formations to enhance hydrocarbon recovery. Wright’s nomination represents a shift in energy policy, prioritizing fossil fuel production over the expansion of low-carbon alternatives, a stance that contrasts with strategies adopted by major oil companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron. In public discourse, Wright has repeatedly emphasized the benefits of fossil fuels in enhancing global economic development and improving quality of life, arguing that renewables alone cannot fully replace hydrocarbons in modern energy systems. His public advocacy includes a notable campaign against The North Face’s refusal to sell branded jackets to an oil and gas company, highlighting the industry’s role in manufacturing synthetic fabrics and other consumer goods.

Liberty Energy has published reports critiquing what Wright describes as a “myopic focus on climate change and climate politics,” asserting that the hyper-politicization of energy debates has led to misguided policy decisions. His views gained prominence after an April 2024 meeting with industry leaders at Mar-a-Lago, where former President Donald Trump reportedly considered him a strong candidate for leading the Department of Energy. If confirmed, Wright is expected to support lifting the Biden administration’s pause on new Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export approvals, which could have far-reaching implications for global energy markets. In a widely discussed incident, Wright faced content moderation issues when a video he uploaded to LinkedIn, in which he questioned the existence of a climate crisis and the notion of an ongoing energy transition, was temporarily removed. He publicly criticized the platform for suppressing debate on energy policy, leading to LinkedIn eventually reinstating the video. Wright’s appointment signals a potential reorientation of U.S. energy policy, emphasizing domestic fossil fuel development as a means of securing energy independence and economic stability. If confirmed, his tenure could mark a departure from previous administrations’ commitments to accelerating renewable energy adoption, instead focusing on reinforcing America’s role as a major supplier of affordable and reliable energy worldwide [24].

The energy transition is an inevitable yet complex process, requiring a delicate balance between environmental goals, economic realities and public health considerations. While renewable energy sources offer a pathway to decarbonization, their dependence on scarce critical minerals and existing technological limitations must be addressed. Simultaneously, fossil fuels continue to play an indispensable role in global energy security, necessitating policies that mitigate their adverse effects while ensuring stability in energy supply. The interplay between energy policies, market forces and geopolitical factors underscores the need for a diversified and adaptive approach. Future strategies must integrate technological innovation, responsible resource management and international cooperation to achieve a sustainable energy framework that safeguards both the environment and human health.

1. Alagoz E, Alghawi Y (2023) The future of fossil fuels: Challenges and opportunities in a low-carbon world. International Journal of Earth Sciences Knowledge and Applications 5(3): 381-388.
2. Alagoz E (2023) Electrifying the transportation sector: Implications for the oil and gas industry. IJESG 8(1): 25-35.
3. Alagoz E (2023) Sustainable development in the oil and gas sector: Considering economic, environmental and social aspects. International Journal of Earth Sciences Knowledge and Applications 5(2): 303-308.
4. Alagoz E, Alghawi Y (2023) The energy transition: Navigating the shift towards renewables in the oil and gas industry. Journal of Energy and Natural Resources 12(2): 21-24.
5. Alagoz E, Mouad AK (2025) Rethinking green energy: Navigating the complexities of sustainability, innovation and energy choices. Progresses in Petrochemical Science 6(5): 712-720.
6. Alagoz E, Alghawi Y, Ergul MS (2023) Innovation in exploration and production: How technology is changing the oil and gas landscape. Journal of Energy and Natural Resources 12(3): 25-29.
7. Alagoz E (2025) Global warming and human comfort: Shifting mortality from cold to heat. Journal of Petroleum & Chemical Engineering/URF Publishers.
8. Alagoz E (2025) Power dynamics and global challenges: A critical exploration of energy, climate and industry. International Journal of Current Research in Science, Engineering & Technology 8(1): 141-147.
9. Our world in data (2023) Bioenergy use in Denmark.
10. Our world in data (2023) Denmark’s electricity generation.
11. Our world in data (2023) PM2.5 and life expectancy.
12. I used a wood-pellet grill for the turkey yesterday.
13. Global energy trends (2024) The continued dominance of fossil fuels.
14. Global energy statistics (2024) Twitter thread on energy transition data.
15. Fossil fuels still winning
16. Global energy trends (2024) OPEC and IEA disputes over oil forecasts.
17. Leen Weijers
18. Gazprom (2024) Gazprom raises 2024 investment plans amid European gas price surge.
19. Russia shut off Natural Gas heating fuel to Austria today, after billing dispute.
20. The energy transition isn’t failing for lack of earnest effort.
21. Devastating news for those clinging to the hope of solar, wind, and batteries.
22. Germany's climate policies drive up costs but deliver near-nothing
23. A 25x increase in U.S. produced lithium? That's what ExxonMobil is trying to do with their Smackover Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) project.
24. The WSJ writes, Trump rewarded the tycoons behind the shale boom with the selection of Chris Wright as nominee for Energy Sec.