Quantcast
Fracking

A Closer Look at Obama's 'All of the Above' Energy Policy

DeSmogBlog

By Sharon Kelly

A year ago, President Obama set forth his vision of America’s energy policy. “We need an energy strategy for the future," he said in a message still prominently displayed on the White House website, "an all-of-the-above strategy for the 21st century that develops every source of American-made energy.”

During the presidential debates, he hammered repeatedly an "all of the above" theme, though he also surprised many by making a strong statement about the urgency of confronting climate change during his second term.

This week, President Obama once more talked about his "all the above" strategy as he announced that he was setting aside $2 billion for research and development on alternative transportation fuels.

Things are looking up for renewable energy, right? Not so fast.

Obama's choice for new directors of the three agencies with the most relevance to climate change—the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Energy and Department of the Interior—do not sew confidence that real change is coming.

Obama selected Ernest Moniz as his choice to run the Department of Energy. An MIT professor and a proponent of fracking, Moniz recently led a controversial study that supported exporting liquefied natural gas and has taken a stance in favor of so-called “clean coal.” His long-standing support for nuclear power was unwavering even in the face of the Fukushima disaster.

The U.S. EPA will be headed by Gina McCarthy, currently the assistant administrator of the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, where she crafted the EPA’s first air pollution rules for fracking and oversaw the development of as-yet-unfinalized standards that would essentially end new construction of coal-fired facilities without carbon capture or other techniques. She has drawn support from both environmentalists and industry alike.

And the person who will oversee the use of public lands is Sally Jewell, a former Mobil Oil engineer and now President and Chief Executive Officer of Recreational Equipment, Inc. (REI). Obama announced her appointment as secretary of Interior, where she will make crucial decisions about leasing federal land for oil and gas fracking or for renewable energy development. Though Jewell has a reputation as a conservationist, she has disclosed owning stock in numerous oil and gas companies, including Anadarko Petroleum Corp., Apache Corp., Chevron Corp., ConocoPhillips and Exxon Mobil Corp, along with Schlumberger and Halliburton.

All of these nominees are known for their active support of an “all of the above” approach on energy.

“I do believe that for this decade, in my context of moving toward lower carbon, natural gas will be a major bridge but it is only a bridge to what I believe will be a required deployment of zero carbon options and we have to see what nuclear’s role is in there,” Moniz told a Senate committee in 2011.

All three of these appointees will help determine whether to build the Keystone XL pipeline or promote shale oil and gas production on federal lands. They will also make major decisions that will affect our energy infrastructure for decades.

The $2 billion clean transportation initiative Obama announced last Friday, described as intended to replace fossil fuels in cars, follows the same pattern. It not only funds research into electric vehicles, biofuels and fuel cells, but also will promote natural gas vehicles.

But a major fallacy lies behind the "all of the above" energy trope President Obama and his nominees have espoused. As an overarching philosophy it sounds appealing and the rhetoric of inclusiveness is beguiling. But as an energy policy, it does not work because fossil fuels have historically had a huge leg up on renewables in terms of subsidies and federal loopholes and advances in technology have only recently made renewables cost competitive with cheap oil, gas and coal.

Wind and solar are at an even deeper disadvantage because the shale gas boom has flooded the market with cheap natural gas—at least over the short run—enticing consumers and utility companies alike. When natural gas supplies are on offer at a fraction of what it costs buy wind or solar energy, what choice do budget-conscious buyers have?

The fallacy of an "all of the above" theme is akin to that behind the "bridge fuel" meme that the drilling industry aggressively promoted as recently as a year ago.

As you surely will recall, proponents of natural gas touted new shale deposits and called for accelerated drilling because natural gas was—according to them—a green alternative to the "old" fossil fuels. Unlike coal and oil, natural gas burned cleaner and would serve as a way for our economy to wean itself from the dirty old fossil fuels to the new green renewables. Indeed, natural gas would serve as a bridge, they said.
 
This idea has been thoroughly debunked by now. The world is warming far too quickly for such a bridge to be built in time. If climate change is going to be reversed or halted, a transition away from fossil fuels has to occur sooner.

Furthermore, the process of extracting natural gas at the wellhead emits enough unburned methane, which has climate changing impacts that can be 30 to 100 times more destructive than those from carbon dioxide, to negate any benefits of lower carbon dioxide emissions at power plants.

Much as the idea of a “bridge fuel” is a mirage—so too is the concept of an "all of the above" approach. It serves as a tool to keep alternate fuels on a distant horizon and distract from the urgent need to shift our energy infrastructure now.

But there is a larger political lesson to be learned here about President Obama and his political calculus when it comes to the environment. It is a lesson that was recently summed up best by energy analyst, Jigar Shah, who made the point that since day one in office, the ever-studious and contemplative Obama has opted on energy for "invention over deployment" and "R&D over job creation and carbon reduction."

What Shah meant is that rather than reckoning with the fact that time is running out regarding climate change and forging ahead with a clear plan to lessen the amount of fossil fuels we use and sharply increase the use of wind and solar and other renewable technology we already have in hand, the president is opting to take the opposite approach: accelerate drilling and further study into renewables.

One quick side note on the ticking clock urgency that is upon us. One need not look far to see that even some of the most conservative commentators around get it. Just read, for example, what Thomas Friedman, by no-means a wild-eyed treehugger, has said recently. In perhaps his most clear-eyed piece on it, Friedman makes this basic point:

"Let’s look at the huge carbon and financial deficits we’re amassing. For thousands of years up to the dawn of the industrial age 200 years ago, the Earth’s atmosphere contained 280 parts per million of the heat-trapping greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. Today, that number is nearly 400 p.p.m., with 450 p.p.m. routinely cited as the tipping point where we create the conditions for out-of-control acceleration."

But President Obama does not seem to recognize this urgency and all signs thus far into his second term seem to indicate that he plans to continue down the path he set during his first term.

Consider his announcement last week: $2 billion for more research on clean transportation. That sounds like a lot of money, especially during a recession. It's actually not. Remember that the stimulus plan set aside over $30 billion for this sort of research and most of it is spent, yet the economy is not a whole lot closer to shifting toward renewables. Meanwhile, most experts agree that we already have the technological capacity to start making the transition to cleaner fuels.

The real reason that Obama is reluctant to direct the weight of the federal government toward the deployment rather than the study of renewables has to do with politics. He got clobbered by the Solyndra scandal. That was the debacle where a solar energy company collapsed, leaving taxpayers on the hook for $535 million.

Even though billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted over the years through subsidies to oil and gas companies, Obama has allowed the Republicans to hammer him with the Solyndra club every time he even glances at the wind or solar industries.

His recent nominees, often described as pragmatic or realistic regulators, seem unlikely to push back and take the type of assertive stance against oil and gas development that is called for.

This is especially true of Moniz, who is currently director of the MIT Energy Initiative, which, since 2006, has received more than $125 million in pledges from the oil and gas industry, according to the Public Accountability Initiative. Moniz also has served on the board of directors of ICF Consulting, which came under fire after it was found that the firm, which has oil and gas industry clients, supplied key analysis for the State Department’s controversial assessment of the Keystone XL project.

"We're concerned that, as energy secretary, Ernest Moniz may take a politically expedient view of harmful fracking and divert resources from solar, geothermal and other renewable energy sources vital to avoiding climate disaster," said Bill Snape of the Center for Biological Diversity in a statement. "We're also concerned that Moniz would be in a position to delay research into the dangers fracking poses to our air, water and climate."

This comes at a time when technological advances have made the idea of relying exclusively on wind and solar more and more practical.

A study announced last week, and soon to be published in the journal Energy Policy, assessed New York state’s energy needs and mapped out a potential program to run the entire state on wind, sun, geothermal energy and water, eliminating dependence on coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear power within 17 years.

"We must be ambitious if we want to promote energy independence and curb global warming," said study co-author Robert Howarth, a Cornell University professor of ecology and environmental biology. "The economics of this plan make sense," added Anthony Ingraffea, a Cornell engineering professor and a co-author of the study. "Now it is up to the political sphere.

Visit EcoWatch’s ENERGY and RENEWABLES pages for more related news on this topic.

——–

Click here to tell Congress to Expedite Renewable Energy.

 

Show Comments ()
Sponsored
vimeo.com

Video Shows Oil Company's Plans to Drill Arctic From Artificial Island

The Liberty Project has posted a video about its proposal to build the nation's first oil production platform in federal waters in the Arctic.

The video was quietly uploaded two months ago and shows Hilcorp Alaska's plan to build an artificial gravel island and undersea pipeline for its offshore drilling project in the Beaufort Sea. Frankly speaking, the five-minute clip—with its all-American voiceover and electric guitar riffs—is something you'd expect from a pickup truck commercial.

Keep reading... Show less
www.youtube.com

Scientists Discover Sea Levels Rose in Sharp Bursts During Last Warming

By Rice University

Scientists from Rice University and Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi's Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies have discovered that Earth's sea level did not rise steadily but rather in sharp, punctuated bursts when the planet's glaciers melted during the period of global warming at the close of the last ice age. The researchers found fossil evidence in drowned reefs offshore Texas that showed sea level rose in several bursts ranging in length from a few decades to one century.

The findings appeared Wednesday in Nature Communications.

Keep reading... Show less
Gemasolar 15 MW Parabolic Power Plant in Spain / Greenpeace

Quitting Coal: New Global Survey Names the Companies, Countries and Cities

More than a quarter of the 1,675 companies that owned or developed coal-fired power capacity since 2010 have entirely left the coal power business, according to new research from CoalSwarm and Greenpeace. This represents nearly 370 large coal-fired power plants—enough to power around six United Kingdoms—and equivalent to nearly half a trillion dollars in assets retired or not developed.

While many generating companies go through this rapid makeover, the research also shows that a total of 23 countries, states and cities will have either phased out coal-fired power plants or set a timeline to do so by 2030.

Keep reading... Show less
Roderick Eime / Flickr / CC BY 2.0

New Evidence Suggests Ancient Egypt Was Brought Down By Volcanoes and Climate Change

Ancient Egypt is often described as an exotic place—pyramids, hieroglyphics, lavishly worshipped kings and queens.

But in many ways, it has a lot of parallels to modern life. It was an economically diverse, culturally vibrant and unequal place.

The millenniums-old society also struggled with a phenomenon that people today know all too well: climate change. And it may have ultimately led to the civilization's demise, according to a new paper by a team of researchers at Yale University.

The team of researchers studied the tail-end of ancient Egypt during the Ptolemaic dynasty between 305-30 BCE.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Portuguese youth plaintiffs, from left to right: Simão and Leonor; Cláudia, Martim and Mariana; André and Sofia. Global Legal Action Network

Kids Harmed by Portugal Fires Reach Key Crowdfunding Goal for Climate Lawsuit

As Portugal reels from its worst wildfires on record, seven Portuguese children have met an important crowdfunding goal for their major climate lawsuit against 47 European nations.

More than £20,000 ($26,400) was pledged by 589 people, allowing the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN)—the nonprofit coordinating the lawsuit—to identify and compile evidence to present to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. GLAN now has a new stretch target of £100,000.

Keep reading... Show less
Flying insects such as bees are important pollinators. Flickr / M I T C H Ǝ L L

German Nature Reserves Have Lost More Than 75% of Flying Insects

A new study published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE adds more evidence that insect populations around the globe are in perilous decline.

For the study, researchers from Radboud University in the Netherlands, alongside their German and English colleagues, measured the biomass of trapped flying insects at 63 nature preserves in Germany since 1989. They were shocked to discover that the total biomass decreased dramatically over the 27 years of the study, with a seasonal decline of 76 percent and mid-summer decline of 82 percent, when insect numbers tend to peak.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Politics

Pushing Toxic Chemicals and Climate Denial: The Dark Money-Funded Independent Women’s Forum

By Stacy Malkan

The Independent Women's Forum is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit that has taken money from tobacco and oil companies, partners with Monsanto, defends toxic chemicals in food and consumer products, denies climate science and argues against laws that would curb the power of corporations.

IWF began in 1991 as an effort to defend now Supreme Court Justice (and former Monsanto attorney) Clarence Thomas as he faced sexual harassment charges. The group now says it seeks to "improve the lives of Americans by increasing the number of women who value free markets and personal liberty."

Keep reading... Show less
Mladen Kostic / iStock

Toxic Toys? After Nine Years, a Ban on Harmful Chemicals Becomes Official

Phthalates are a particularly harmful type of chemical, used, among a range of other ways, to soften plastic in children's toys and products like pacifiers and teething rings. In response to mounting concern about the serious health impacts of phthalates—most notably, interference with hormone production and reproductive development in young children—Congress voted overwhelmingly in 2008 to outlaw the use of a few phthalates in these products and ordered the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to assess the use of other types of the chemical in these products. After much delay, the CPSC voted 3–2 Wednesday to ban five additional types of phthalates in kids' toys and childcare products.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored

mail-copy

Get EcoWatch in your inbox