Ukraine’s energy heritage is a colonial heritage that manifests itself through the built environment and through a geopolitical imaginary of Ukraine as a “transit country” for Russian gas to Europe. This chapter puts the development of Ukrainian energy independence in the context of its broader decolonial commemorative and nation-building activities. Studies of oil heritage usually focus on crude oil producers, where there are efforts to preserve oil infrastructure and commemorate its role in nation-building. However, for more than two decades following independence, Ukraine’s energy infrastructure trapped it in a relationship of energy dependence on Russia. Soviet policy led to this: (1) overusing Ukrainian gas fields to help build up oil and gas infrastructure in Siberia; (2) building pipelines that only let resources flow from East to West; (3) putting energy-intensive industries at the top of the list for development in Ukraine; and (4) planning Ukrainian cities so they would need a lot of natural gas for heating, with industrial and residential needs being combined. The Russian Federation has continued to exploit this relationship to maintain political control. Symbolically, Ukraine was long characterized as a buffer zone between Russia and Europe, denying Ukraine’s agency. The chapter analyzes how gas industry communications now emphasize Ukrainian hydrocarbon production and orientation toward Europe to overcome the “transit country” imaginary. It presents ways that Ukraine could overcome its material energy heritage to become energy independent. For example, it discusses the opportunities that exist in biofuels made from Ukraine’s agricultural produce, renewable electricity production for the European energy grid, and making homes more energy efficient through renovations and the growth of a circular economy. There is tension between various and sometimes conflicting sets of advice on how to develop a green economy that Ukraine receives from its many international partners. Ukraine’s shift to European energy integration should not trade one dependency for another. The Russian invasion has provided an existential motivation for the transition to a renewable energy future and the potential for developing a post-oil nationalism and energy heritage. There are challenges: the best opportunities for renewable electricity production are in currently occupied territories. Simultaneously, the wartime destruction of housing stock and infrastructure, along with substantial projected inflows of reconstruction aid, has accelerated post-oil urbanization. Beyond the preservation of oil heritage significant to nation-building, Ukraine’s efforts to overcome material and symbolic energy heritages provide a unique example of post-oil nation-building.

From Soviet Oil Heritage to a European Energy Future in Ukraine

章节
发表日期：

2025年

查看全文

Amanda Zadorian,
Nathan Mark Hutson

摘要

Ukraine’s energy heritage is a colonial heritage that manifests itself through the built environment and through a geopolitical imaginary of Ukraine as a “transit country” for Russian gas to Europe. This chapter puts the development of Ukrainian energy independence in the context of its broader decolonial commemorative and nation-building activities. Studies of oil heritage usually focus on crude oil producers, where there are efforts to preserve oil infrastructure and commemorate its role in nation-building. However, for more than two decades following independence, Ukraine’s energy infrastructure trapped it in a relationship of energy dependence on Russia. Soviet policy led to this: (1) overusing Ukrainian gas fields to help build up oil and gas infrastructure in Siberia; (2) building pipelines that only let resources flow from East to West; (3) putting energy-intensive industries at the top of the list for development in Ukraine; and (4) planning Ukrainian cities so they would need a lot of natural gas for heating, with industrial and residential needs being combined. The Russian Federation has continued to exploit this relationship to maintain political control. Symbolically, Ukraine was long characterized as a buffer zone between Russia and Europe, denying Ukraine’s agency. The chapter analyzes how gas industry communications now emphasize Ukrainian hydrocarbon production and orientation toward Europe to overcome the “transit country” imaginary. It presents ways that Ukraine could overcome its material energy heritage to become energy independent. For example, it discusses the opportunities that exist in biofuels made from Ukraine’s agricultural produce, renewable electricity production for the European energy grid, and making homes more energy efficient through renovations and the growth of a circular economy. There is tension between various and sometimes conflicting sets of advice on how to develop a green economy that Ukraine receives from its many international partners. Ukraine’s shift to European energy integration should not trade one dependency for another. The Russian invasion has provided an existential motivation for the transition to a renewable energy future and the potential for developing a post-oil nationalism and energy heritage. There are challenges: the best opportunities for renewable electricity production are in currently occupied territories. Simultaneously, the wartime destruction of housing stock and infrastructure, along with substantial projected inflows of reconstruction aid, has accelerated post-oil urbanization. Beyond the preservation of oil heritage significant to nation-building, Ukraine’s efforts to overcome material and symbolic energy heritages provide a unique example of post-oil nation-building.