Monbiot - the Fly in the Ointment

 


When it comes to averting climate catastrophe there are many perilous challenges but one stands head and shoulders above the rest - the very people we elect to high office.  George Monbiot writes they're selling us and especially our young down the river.

In seeking to prevent environmental breakdown, what counts above all is not the new things we do, but the old things we stop doing. Renewable power, for instance, is useful in preventing climate chaos only to the extent that it displaces fossil fuels. Unfortunately, new technologies do not always lead automatically to the destruction of old ones.

Fossil fuel companies need spend just a fraction of their income on lobbying – funding politicians and their parties, buying the services of thinktanks and public relations agencies, using advertising to greenwash their credentials – to impede the energy transition and defend their investments. Fossil fuels will become stranded assets only when governments insist that they be left in the ground. Yet, somehow, a major strand of thinking in rich nations continues to ignore this obvious truth.

What exactly is Monbiot on about? The same thing that Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, then head of the Potsdam climate institute, stated at the 2015 Paris climate summit - our only hope of averting catastrophic, runaway climate change required the "induced implosion" of the fossil energy giants. Their threat to humanity and other life on Earth has become so grave that they must be put down.

Whether Liberals will admit it or not, we have a shameless greenwasher for a prime minister. All this bullshit about carbon capture is smoke blown up your backside.  Trudeau's infernal pipeline to the Pacific and this new, million bbl per day seabed oil field off Newfoundland speak for themselves.

On Monday, the Guardian released an analysis they conducted of pending oil and gas projects, Carbon Bombs, that will destroy life as we've known it.  The fossil energy industry and their political minions, they wrote, are "betting against humanity." Let that sink in for a minute.

Of course that was from the Guardian and, after all, they're tree huggers.  How about an alternative view from a respected source recognized to be energy friendly or at least neutral - the International Energy Agency.

The world’s leading energy economist has warned against investing in large new oil and gas developments, which would have little impact on the current energy crisis and soaring fuel prices but spell devastation to the planet.

Soaring global energy prices have led governments to seek new sources of fossil fuels. “I do understand why countries are reacting like this,” he said. “But there is the issue of the time horizon.”

Big new exploratory projects for oil, gas and coal would take years to produce any fuel and could lock in high greenhouse gas emissions for decades, Birol warned.

On Wednesday, the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, reiterated that the time for talk is over.

The UN secretary general called for an end to new fossil fuel projects, warning that climate change posed “an existential threat to us all – to the whole world”.

Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, António Guterres said: “Main emitters must drastically cut emissions, starting now. This means accelerating the end of our fossil fuel addiction and speeding up the deployment of clean renewable energy.”

The IEA advised almost exactly a year ago that no new gas, oil or coal development could take place from this year onwards if the world was to limit global heating to 1.5C. That finding caused shockwaves among governments in the run-up to the UN Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow in November, where leaders agreed to bring forward national plans in line with the 1.5C limit.


Comment Response:

TB, November will usher in the COP-27 climate summit.  Just like earlier COP summits, it's being heralded as our last chance to act. Is it any wonder that some in the science community are beginning to question why they should bother preparing new studies when the pols have all the information they could possibly need yet refuse to heed the warnings?

This effort dates back to 1992. 30 years of grand promises and hot air. Can we fault their cynicism?


Owen, realism is anything but pessimism.





Comments

  1. TrailblazerMay 15, 2022 at 7:37 AM

    What chance is there of a united action to stop climate change when the flavor of the day is outrage at high fuel prices and the restrictions that brings?
    We are just coming out of the restrictions of covid and it's burn baby burn when it comes to gasoline and aviation fuel consumption.
    We have become addicted to oil and gas consumption , how to cure the addiction is the question to ask ourselves.
    TB

    ReplyDelete
  2. Owen GrayMay 15, 2022 at 11:14 AM

    I get more pessimistic with each passing day.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Up in Smoke. 300 Sq. Mi. of Amazon Rainforest Lost Every Day.

Image
  The Amazon rainforest is disappearing at what should be an alarming rate. 312 sq. mi. or 808 sq. kms. every day. Over the past 30 years humans have destroyed a patch of the Amazon equal in area to the states of Texas and New Mexico . The Amazon – historically a great carbon absorber, since trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen – now releases more carbon than it stores, which adds to, rather helps to reduce, our global climate crisis. Deforestation rates decreased slightly from 2004 to 2012. But since then, they’re back on the rise, especially in the past couple of years, since Jair Bolsonaro became president of Brazil. In 2018, as Bolsonaro campaigned as a patriotic man of the people, scientists predicted that once the Amazon lost more than 25% of its tree cover, it would become a drier ecosystem, all because deforestation changes weather patterns (due to how trees respire), which in turn reduces rainfall. Furthermore, as the forest becomes fragmented, areas surrounded...
Read more

The Cognoscenti Syndrome

  There is a group of people I think of as the Cognoscenti, people who are well educated, very informed and of rapidly diminishing relevance. Their ranks include writers such as Chris Hedges and Glen Greenwald. These are people who have honed an almost Puritanical value system, readily finding fault in any direction. They are scathing in their attacks on Republicans and Democrats alike to the point where they become nihilists. They don't endorse. They prescribe. This is where they fail. They're unable to advocate for anything that might resonate with the public whose interests they argue are being trammeled. Donald Trump was bad but Joe Biden is scarcely better. This is where their elitism comes in.  74 million may have voted for Trump but, hey, they didn't know any better. The mob that stormed the Capitol. They were just victims of the system venting their frustrations. All the racism, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, white nationalism - inevitable side effects of their oppr...
Read more

Who Asks "Why?"

Every time there's a conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, all we hear is 'why?'  Why, as in, whose fault is this? It's easier to affix blame if you can truncate the event. Pick a convenient start date, something recent. In this case we'll make it either the Israeli eviction of Arabs from Jerusalem or the scuffle that took place outside the mosque in response. If those don't work, let's go for Hamas launching unguided rockets into Israel. That's even better because it tags Hamas with the blame. The nice thing about this approach is you can just keep using it. It goes on and on, just as it has for the past half-century since the '67 war. You can even date this whole mess to the beginning of the occupation of the Palestinian territories. The Israelis are said to have called these periodic wars, "mowing the lawn." The idea is that, every now and then, you have to take these Arabs to the woodshed. And then you keep your powder dry unt...
Read more