3 New Years Resolutions That Will End the World's Dependency on Fossil Fuels
1. Take Delivery: Accelerate pre-2020 Compliance with Emission Reduction Pledges
The Paris accord—by contrast with Rio and Kyoto—was a bottom-up exercise in open-source diplomacy. National governments largely were significantly influenced by the leadership of cities, the private sector and community and civic organizations.
But it was still nations that agreed to the text. And the text, as massive commentary has groaned and complained, is not binding. (Neither, in any meaningful sense, were Rio and Kyoto. The U.S. violated Rio which it ratified, and Canada walked from Kyoto. No traffic tickets were issued).
Photo credit: Shutterstock
But the essence of Paris is the belief that nations want to carry out their emission reduction, clean energy and ecosystem protection pledges, because it is in their self-interest. But wanting to accelerate low-carbon development and getting it done are two different things—and the biggest challenge for the climate movement is to dramatically speed up successful implementation of the Paris commitments made by almost 200 nations.
There’s good news. The Chinese government, with the world’s biggest emissions, just announced that it will stop permitting new coal mines. The nation will also increase its wind and solar capacity by 21 percent.
And bad. Both Tanzania and Bangladesh are poised to increase their reliance on coal, although both have huge renewables potentials, because the international financing mechanisms to launch a renewables revolution like China’s are not in place, and seem to have a very low priority among the world’s finance ministries.
Worse, the U.S. has not yet taken essential steps to meets its 26-28 percent emission reduction target. While the Obama Administration has moved aggressively to cut carbon emissions from utilities, and improve efficiency of cars and trucks, three of the key pillars of its Paris pledge remain in limbo:
- In Paris, the White House committed to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40 percent. But so far it has not ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate these emissions from existing sources, leaving it to the demonstrably inadequate regulatory systems of the various states. If this loophole is not closed, the U.S. will not meet the methane target—or its Paris pledge.
- President Obama has also promised—and nagged his fellow world leaders—to eliminate subsidies of fossil fuels. Yet the U.S. remains one of the biggest offenders. U.S. tax subsidies for the oil industry are, it is true, in the hands of Congress, and Obama can’t unilaterally repeal them. But he just agreed to permit oil exports, a huge favor to the U.S. industry, without insisting on ending the subsidies as part of the deal. And coal industry subsidies are largely controlled by the Department of the Interior, which could eliminate most of them by simply reforming the procedures by which it leases and collects royalties on coal mined on public land.
- Obama also pledged in Paris that the federal government would purchase huge numbers of hybrid and EV vehicles, so that by 2020 20 percent of its fleet would be run by advanced, low-carbon technologies. But federal purchasing authorities continual to obstruct this transition, and the Post Office is being permitted to buy 180,000 new internal combustion powered vehicles.
Focused, energetic efforts to make sure that the pledges made in Paris are redeemed between now and 2020 are the key to what happens in terms of the essential acceleration of climate progress after 2020. And since the pledges made in Paris will be redeemed in homes and factories and offices and cities around the world, by planning departments, utility regulators, pollution control agencies, purchasing departments, and a host of other businesses, agencies and institutions, this is a perfect bottom up opportunity to build a climate movement locally around each country’s solemn Paris promises.
2. Follow the Money: Target the Fossil Industrial Complex
While reliance on clean energy has been accelerating globally, and will almost certainly continue to flower, the grim reality in the year leading up to the Paris Accord, the world economy burned 5.5 billion tons of coal, only slightly below the record set in 2013. And demand for oil rose to an all time high of 94 million barrels a day. Progress at cutting use of coal and oil is painfully slow.
But now that low carbon energy is, at the margin, competitive with fossil fuels, and headed towards a robust price advantage, it is the politics, not the economics, that keeps carbon ruling the roost. The politics of maintaining subsidies, protecting monopolies and choking off clean energy are the biggest threat to climate progress. This politics is not leveraged by the existence of oil and coal in the ground—but by the entrenched power of the fossil industrial complex, companies that produce, market or provide supply chain resources to fossil fuel consumption. Take down the companies, and the politics becomes vastly easier for emission reductions.
And here, the vulnerabilities look spectacularly different than they did a year ago. Paris itself, of course, was Big Carbon’s deepest defeat. But it was signaled by events like the rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, the Alberta Accords setting a permanent limit on carbon emissions from the tar sands, the announcement of the 200th retirement from the once invincible U.S. coal power fleet, and Shell’s withdrawal from explorations in the Chukchi Sea.
Most spectacular perhaps was the collapse of the global coal industry, with dozens of companies going into bankruptcy and their combined market value in the U.S. falling by more than 90 percent. The economics and stock value of private oil companies hasn’t fallen as far or as fast, but the industry has been forced to slash expenditures on new exploration, and cut payroll. Smaller, independent oil and gas companies in Canada in particular have been forced into or close to bankruptcy. Even the mightiest of the mighty, Saudi Arabia, had to double the cost it charged its own citizens for oil and is running enormous deficits.
Global coal prices are down more than 50 percent since 2011, and oil has fallen even faster, down more than half since 2014. These prices don’t stop the world from burning these fuels—in the short term they encourage it. But they dry up the pool of exorbitant profits that made oil and coal global economic and political juggernauts. The Alberta Accords are the best example—it was the combination of low global oil prices and environmental campaign success in denying the Tar Sands producers pipeline access they needed to cut costs that forced the Canadian oil industry to negotiate with the Government—and that combination can be a model for climate campaigners.
Go after the money, not the carbon.
3. Cheap is Good: Relish our Role as the “low priced spread”
U.S. butter producers used to mock margarine as “the low priced spread.” Margarine still stole most of butter’s market. Renewable energy is rapidly becoming the low-price spread—but neither the media (nor climate campaigners) yet understand how to talk about it—we continue to see polls asking “how much more” would the public pay for clean energy, when it will cost less than continuing dependence on fossil fuels.
This is not yet true in every use or every location—but renewable energy and alternative vehicles get cheaper the more of them we make and use. Oil and coal get more expensive the more of them we burn. So we can be confident that clean energy wins the affordability race—but we haven’t yet figured out how to educate the public, media and policy makers about how to take advantage of that opportunity. We’re not even really comfortable ourselves saying it.
That’s for my next blog.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
By Simon Montlake
For more than a decade, Susan Jane Brown has been battling to stop a natural gas pipeline and export terminal from being built in the backcountry of Oregon. As an attorney at the nonprofit Western Environmental Law Center, she has repeatedly argued that the project's environmental, social, and health costs are too high.
All that was before this month's deadly wildfires in Oregon shrouded the skies above her home office in Portland. "It puts a fine point on it. These fossil fuel projects are contributing to global climate change," she says.
Moderates Feeling the Heat<p>If elected, Mr. Biden has vowed to stop new drilling for oil and gas on federal land and in federal waters and to rejoin the 2015 Paris climate accord that President Donald Trump gave notice of quitting. He would reinstate Obama-era regulations of greenhouse gas emissions, including methane, the largest component of natural gas.</p><p>The Biden climate platform also states that all federal infrastructure investments and federal permits would need to be assessed for their climate impacts. Analysts say such a test could impede future LNG plants and pipelines, though not those that already have federal approval. </p><p>Climate change activists who pushed for that language say much depends on who would have oversight of federal agencies that regulate the industry. Some are wary of Biden's reliance on advice from Obama-era officials, including former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, who is now on the board of Southern Company, a utility, and a former Obama environmental aide, Heather Zichal, who has served on the board of Cheniere Energy, an LNG exporter. </p>
The Push for U.S. Fuel Exports<p>As vice president, Biden was part of an administration that pushed hard for global climate action while also promoting U.S. oil and gas exports to its allies and trading partners. As fracking boomed, Obama ended a 40-year ban on crude oil exports. In Europe, LNG was touted both as an alternative to coal and as strategic competition with Russian pipelines.</p><p>That much, at least, continued with President Trump. Under Energy Secretary Rick Perry, the agency referred to liquified U.S. hydrocarbons as "<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/us/freedom-gas-energy-department.html" target="_blank">freedom gas</a>."</p><p>Mr. Trump has also championed the interests of coal, oil, and gas while denigrating the findings of government climate scientists. He rejected the Paris accord as unfair to the U.S. and detrimental to its economy, but has offered no alternative path to emissions cuts. </p><p>Still, Trump's foreign policy has not always served the LNG industry: Tariffs on foreign steel drove up pipeline costs, and a trade war with China stayed the hand of Chinese LNG importers wary of reliance on U.S. suppliers. </p><p>Even his regulatory rollbacks could be a double-edged sword. By relaxing curbs last month on methane leaks, the U.S. has ceded ground to European regulators who are drafting emissions standards that LNG producers are watching closely. "That's a precursor of fights that will be fought in all the rest of the developed world," says Mr. Hutchison. </p><p>Indeed, some oil-and-gas exporters had urged the Trump administration not to abandon the tougher rules, since they undercut their claim to offer a cleaner-burning way of producing heat and electricity. "U.S. LNG is not going to be able to compete in a world that's focused on methane emissions and intensity," says Erin Blanton, a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University. </p>
Stepping on the Gas<p>In July, the Department of Energy issued an export license to Jordan Cove's developer, Canada's Pembina Pipeline Corp. In a statement, Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette said the project would provide "reliable, affordable, and cleaner-burning natural gas to our allies around the world."</p><p>As a West Coast terminal, Jordan Cove offers a faster route to Asia where its capacity of 7.8 million tons of LNG a year could serve to heat more than 15 million homes. At its peak, its construction would also create 6,000 jobs, the company says, in a stagnant corner of Oregon.</p><p>But the project still lacks multiple local and state permits, and its biggest asset – a Pacific port – has become its biggest handicap, says Ms. Blanton. "They are putting infrastructure in a state where there's no political support for the pipeline or the terminal, unlike in Louisiana or Texas," she says. </p><p>Ms. Brown, the environmental lawyer, says she wants to see Jordan Cove buried, not just mothballed until natural gas prices recover. But she knows that it's only one among many LNG projects and that others will likely get built, even if Biden is elected in November, despite growing evidence of the harm caused by methane emissions. </p>
- Biden Commits to Banning Fossil Fuel Subsidies After DNC Dropped It ›
- As Biden Embraces More Ambitious Climate Plan, Fossil Fuel Execs ... ›
- Biden Announces $2 Trillion Climate and Green Recovery Plan ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
By Grayson Jaggers
The connection between the pandemic and our dietary habits is undeniable. The stress of isolation coupled with a struggling economy has caused many of us to seek comfort with our old friends: Big Mac, Tom Collins, Ben and Jerry. But overindulging in this kind of food and drink might not just be affecting your waistline, but could potentially put you at greater risk of illness by hindering your immune system.
- 15 Indigenous Crops to Boost Your Immune System and Celebrate ... ›
- 15 Supplements to Boost Your Immune System Right Now - EcoWatch ›
- Should I Exercise During the Coronavirus Pandemic? Experts ... ›
- The Immune System's Fight Against the Coronavirus - EcoWatch ›
As the world continues to navigate the line between reopening and maintaining safety protocols to slow the spread of the coronavirus, rapid and accurate diagnostic screening remains critical to control the outbreak. New mobile-phone-based, self-administered COVID-19 tests being developed independently around the world could be a key breakthrough in making testing more widely available, especially in developing nations.
- FDA Approves First In-Home Test for Coronavirus - EcoWatch ›
- When Should You Get a COVID-19 or Antibody Test? - EcoWatch ›
- Trump Plans to End Federal Funding for COVID-19 Testing Sites ... ›
- Trump Insider Embeds Climate Denial Into Agency Reports ... ›
- Climate Denier Is Named to Leadership Role at NOAA - EcoWatch ›
New Jersey is one step closer to passing what environmental advocates say is the strongest anti-plastic legislation in the nation.