The impact of the proportion of renewable energy consumption on geopolitical risks in the United States and the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Renewable energy serves as an effective alternative to traditional fossil fuels, reducing reliance on energy imports from specific countries, thereby alleviating geopolitical risks and ensuring national energy security. The development and utilization of renewable energy have profound implications for the global energy consumption structure and geopolitical landscape. This paper utilizes time-series and panel data from 1990 to 2020 to examine the causal relationship between renewable energy consumption and geopolitical risks. Focusing primarily on the United States and the United Kingdom, a multivariate regression model was developed for empirical analysis, with a comparative analysis conducted against other Group of Seven (G7) member countries. Subsequent robustness checks were performed to further validate the model's robustness. Additionally, this study explores the role of military strength as a moderating variable in the relationship between renewable energy and geopolitics. Lastly, a vector autoregression model was constructed to analyze the dynamic relationships between renewable energy and related variables. The findings reveal that (1) consumption of clean renewable energies, such as solar, wind, and tidal energy, significantly reduces geopolitical risks in the United States and the United Kingdom, with differing empirical results for France, Canada, and Japan, interpreted according to their developmental contexts and (2) increased defense expenditure in the US and the UK significantly enhances the positive impact of renewable energy consumption on mitigating geopolitical risks. Utilizing renewable energy not only diversifies national energy options but also reduces reliance on fossil fuels and fosters international cooperation, thereby easing geopolitical tensions. This research enriches the literature on the relationship between renewable energy consumption and national energy security in key global nations and offers theoretical insights for the formulation and implementation of national energy development strategies in the new world development paradigm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".