Quantcast

President Obama, Are You a Climate Champion or a Climate Hypocrite?

Climate

President Obama just gave away the American Arctic Ocean to one of the most irresponsible oil companies on Earth, and he will bear responsibility for the consequences. The decision to green light every step of Shell’s pathway to its oil and gas lease in the Chukchi Sea was a critical test of President Obama’s climate legacy, and he failed.

Drilling for Arctic oil and gas is unnecessary and should not even be up for consideration according to the latest climate science. Yet over the past five months, the federal government has been busy removing any and all administrative hurdles in Shell’s way. After affirming the original lease sale and approving every permit needed to discharge pollution, harass wildlife and transport its drilling fleet to the Chukchi Sea, it looks like the Obama administration wants Shell there as quickly as possible.

The irony of President Obama’s climate position is not lost on the American people. We have repeatedly been told about the unprecedented threat that climate change poses to the health and well-being of our environment and society. In his 2015 State of the Union address, President Obama said, “No challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.”

At the United Nations Climate Change Summit in October 2014, he said the urgent and growing threat of climate change will dramatically define this century and that the U.S. is stepping up and embracing our responsibility to combat it. On the contrary, he continues to let companies like Shell move forward with destructive fossil fuel projects.

The question every American should be asking right now is: “President Obama, are you a climate champion or a climate hypocrite?”

If Shell’s more than $7 billion gamble leads to the discovery of recoverable oil and gas deposits, the earliest production could begin is between 2025 and 2030. By 2025, however, the U.S. has agreed to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels. Despoiling the pristine Arctic to increase oil and gas production at a time when we need to be reducing emissions makes no logical sense.

Read page 1

If President Obama earnestly wants to use his remaining term in office to combat climate change, his choice regarding oil and gas development in the Arctic Ocean should be easy. If Shell continues to get its way, we are faced with a very bleak future:

  • Unpredictable sea ice conditions and storms lead to accidents for Shell’s drilling fleet, where emergency responses are limited due their location 70 miles from shore and nearly 1,000 miles from the nearest Coast Guard base.

  • A 75 percent chance of a large oil spill that Arctic conditions make extremely difficult and nearly impossible to contain or clean up.

  • A number of iconic marine animal species, including threatened and endangered species like the Pacific walrus and polar bear, are harassed during Shell’s drilling operations.

  • Subsistence hunters are unable to access or hunt the animals that are of vital importance to their culture.

  • Climate change is exacerbated as the extraction and burning of Arctic oil and gas releases an estimated 15.8 billion tons of carbon emissions. As a result, reductions in sea ice continue to reach record levels and coastal erosion forces several Alaska Native villages to permanently relocate.

But this does not have to be the new reality for the American Arctic Ocean. President Obama has one last opportunity to stop this reckless and short-sighted project. He can deny Shell’s revised application to allow for deeper drilling of oil and gas deposits and protect the people and wildlife that depend on a vibrant Chukchi Sea environment from a toxic legacy that will surely last decades.

If President Obama takes a stand, billions of gallons of oil will be left in the ground, and an important message sent to Big Oil: the oil and gas deposits contained under the American Arctic Ocean belong to the American people and will be managed in their best interest, not the interest of growing Big Oil’s profits. The legitimacy of U.S. leadership as head of the Arctic Council will be strengthened and President Obama will be poised to start a needed discussion about curtailing fossil fuel extraction going into the United Nations climate talks in Paris this winter.

The American Arctic Ocean is a sensitive, ecologically-rich, and unforgiving environment, making it one of the worst places to drill but one of the best places to stand up and say “No!” to Big Oil. President Obama should be held responsible for his deeds and not his words. He can no longer hide behind his climate legacy rhetoric while giving Shell access to Arctic oil and gas without being called a climate hypocrite. The American people, the Arctic Ocean and our climate future expect and deserve better.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Arctic Oil Drilling Is a Climate Disaster, Says New Report

10 Years Later: Fracking and the Halliburton Loophole

Shell Dumps ALEC as Oil Giant Prepares to Drill in Arctic

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Rebecca Burgess came up with the idea of a fibersheds project to develop an eco-friendly, locally sourced wardrobe. Nicolás Boullosa / CC BY 2.0

By Tara Lohan

If I were to open my refrigerator, the origins of most of the food wouldn't be too much of a mystery — the milk, cheese and produce all come from relatively nearby farms. I can tell from the labels on other packaged goods if they're fair trade, non-GMO or organic.

Read More Show Less
A television crew reports on Hurricane Dorian while waves crash against the Banana River sea wall. Paul Hennessy / SOPA Images / LightRocket / Getty Images

By Mark Hertsgaard and Kyle Pope

Some good news, for a change, about climate change: When hundreds of newsrooms focus their attention on the climate crisis, all at the same time, the public conversation about the problem gets better: more prominent, more informative, more urgent.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Mike Braun (R-Ind.) met with Bill Gates on Nov. 7 to discuss climate change and ways to address the challenge. Senator Chris Coons

The U.S. Senate's bipartisan climate caucus started with just two members, a Republican from Indiana and a Democrat from Delaware. Now it's up to eight members after two Democrats, one Independent and three more Republicans joined the caucus last week, as The Hill reported.

Read More Show Less
EPA scientists survey aquatic life in Newport, Oregon. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to significantly limit the use of science in agency rulemaking around public health, the The New York Times reports.

Read More Show Less
A timelapse video shows synthetic material and baby fish collected from a plankton sample from a surface slick taken off Hawaii's coast. Honolulu Star-Advertiser / YouTube screenshot

A team of researchers led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration didn't intend to study plastic pollution when they towed a tiny mesh net through the waters off Hawaii's West Coast. Instead, they wanted to learn more about the habits of larval fish.

Read More Show Less
Sponsored
Two silver-backed chevrotain caught on camera trap. The species has only recently been rediscovered after being last seen in 1990. GWC / Mongabay

By Jeremy Hance

VIETNAM, July 2019 – I'm chasing a ghost, I think not for the first time, as night falls and I gather up my gear in a hotel in a village in southern Vietnam. I pack my camera, a bottle of water, and a poncho; outside the window I can see a light rain.

Read More Show Less
(L) Selma Three Stone Engagement Ring. (R) The Greener Diamond Farm Project. MiaDonna

By Bailey Hopp

If you had to choose a diamond for your engagement ring from below or above the ground, which would you pick … and why would you pick it? This is the main question consumers are facing when picking out their diamond engagement ring today. With a dramatic increase in demand for conflict-free lab-grown diamonds, the diamond industry is shifting right before our eyes.

Read More Show Less
Flooding in New Orleans from Hurricane Katrina on Sept. 11, 2005. NOAA Photo Library / Lieut. Commander Mark Moran

The most destructive hurricanes are three times more frequent than they were a century ago, new research has found, and this can be "unequivocally" linked to the climate crisis.

Read More Show Less