Ignoring the evidence showing fossil fuels are a major contributor to global warming, GOP delegates touted their benefits at the climate talks on Friday.
A Republican delegation took the stage at this year’s climate talks, and in what is being described as a bold move at a meeting that’s all about curbing carbon emissions, touted the virtues of continuing to use fossil fuels, according to the Associated Press.
Scientists worldwide are in agreement that heat-trapping gases such as those released from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas are pushing up global temperatures, causing sea-level rise, extreme weather, and species extinction.
Yet Representative John Curtis, R-Utah, said it would be wrong to demonize fossil fuels.
“I think we need to decide as a world: Do we hate greenhouse gas emissions or do we hate fossil fuels,” said Curtis, who is known for founding the Conservative Climate Caucus. “It’s not the same thing.”
Taking the ball down the field a step further, Representative Garret Graves, R-La., suggested fossil fuels can be a form of clean energy – if only the carbon released by extracting and burning them could be captured and stored safely, reports CTV News Canada.
“One of the things we ought to be doing is not attacking oil and gas, it’s to be attacking the emissions associated with it, to where it can be indistinguishable from other renewable energy technologies,” he told an audience in the U.S. pavilion at the climate talks in Sharm el-Sheikh.
Graves argued that we should make fossil fuels “an arrow in the quiver as we try to address our objectives of energy affordability, reliability, cleanliness, exportability and security of supply chain.”
Echoes of the fossil fuel industry
It seems that Republicans have joined forces with the fossil fuel industry in their efforts to separate carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels in the public’s perception, which is nothing more than trying to sugar-coat a nasty-tasting medicine.
However, Andrea Dutton, a professor of geoscience and MacArthur Fellow at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said in an email, “Burning fossil fuels release greenhouse gases that are causing temperatures to rise rapidly, and this is the major contributor to the global warming we are experiencing. This is not a matter of belief but rather a matter of scientific evidence.”
Yes, there have been some positive efforts in reducing emissions by the fossil fuel industry over the past few years – but those advances are due primarily to government regulation and pressure from those concerned about climate change
Neither coal, oil nor gas is anywhere near being a clean source of energy. And with rising greenhouse gas emissions, based on data from the Global Carbon Project, we can’t pick and choose which one we should hate.
One solution promoted by the industry is the idea of carbon capture, to prevent emissions from reaching the atmosphere and storing the gas underground. There is also “direct air capture,” which would be able to remove emissions once they are in the air.
The problem with these technologies is their cost. No one has yet to demonstrate a cost-effective way of doing either at scale, said Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University.
“Renewables are presently the cheapest energy — even without carbon capture on fossil fuels — so adding carbon capture is never going to be the economically superior solution,” he said.
Natural gas – a slightly cleaner fossil fuel?
Representative Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, said that replacing one fossil fuel — coal — with a slightly cleaner one — natural gas — would already result in big emissions cuts. But notice he said gas was “slightly cleaner” than coal.
He added that in the United States natural gas has already displaced coal in many cases and is responsible for substantial reductions of one main greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, in recent years.
“Let them build the pipelines they need, let them build the export terminals they need,” Crenshaw told the audience in Egypt, adding that the effect would be “the equivalent of giving every American solar panels, giving every American a Tesla, and doubling our wind capacity.”
Natural gas is low in carbon dioxide, but Crenshaw failed to mention it is mostly made up of methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas, and satellite images and data show that methane leaks from every stage of production.
“To solve the climate crisis we have to stop emitting carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere,” said Jonathan T. Overpeck, dean of the University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability. “The production and use of natural gas does both, so we have to stop using natural gas as soon as we can.”
Crenshaw, the lawmaker from Texas, accused “radical environmentalists” of exaggerating the threat posed by climate change and misstating the science. “Let’s not lie to our children and scare them to death, then tell them they’re going to burn alive because of this,” he said.
Donald Wuebbles, a University of Illinois professor of atmospheric sciences, argued that “Nobody’s out there saying children are going to burn to death. What we are saying is this is an extremely serious problem, perhaps the most serious problem humanity has ever faced and we need to deal with it.”
