SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Things don't seem to be getting any easier for Big Oil and I am going to venture a guess that 2015 is going to be their toughest year yet.
Here are a few of the hurdles that are only going to grow for the industry over the coming year:
The science:
Things don't seem to be getting any easier for Big Oil and I am going to venture a guess that 2015 is going to be their toughest year yet.
Here are a few of the hurdles that are only going to grow for the industry over the coming year:
The science:
You can ignore the science, resist the science, or support politics that doesn't believe in science, but you can't change the science. 2014 captured the title of hottest year on record, marking the 38th consecutive year that global temperatures have been above average. California is still grappling with the impacts of the biggest drought in memory, and "once in a century" storms, floods, fires, and droughts have become a joke as they hit with increasing frequency.
Big Oil can't change the fact that their product is driving dangerous climate change, nor the fact that if the world is going to avoid the worst of it, the majority of fossil fuels that we know exist are going to have to stay underground. The science is definitive and decision makers are running out of ways to avoid taking it seriously.
The people:
People get it. 400,000 of them came to the biggest climate march in history in New York in September with tens of thousands more joining marches in hundreds of cities around the world. Across North America, people are stopping tar sands pipelines. There is not a single major tar sands pipeline that is not threatened by public opposition on the continent, and these delays are making a dent in pollution and are a material risk to fossil fuel expansion.
Driving and inspiring much of this opposition is resistance from people on the front lines of climate change and fossil fuel extraction: First Nations in Alberta standing up to the tar sands, landowners in Nebraska saying no to the inevitable risks of Keystone XL, and vulnerable and impacted communities globally refusing to let climate impacts go unnoticed. This movement is growing by the minute.
The economics:
Even before the precipitous fall of oil prices in late 2014, fossil fuel projects were being cancelled in places like the tar sands and the Arctic Ocean. It is quite simply not great economics to bet the farm on high cost, high risk, and high carbon projects. Even with oil prices over 100$ per barrel in early 2014, three major tar sands projects were mothballed due to uncertain economics (driven in large part by public concern and transportation constraints).
Now, with oil prices a shadow of what they were kicking off 2014, analysts say at least $59 billion dollars of capital is on the brink of deferral in the tar sands over the coming 3 years, with the potential of knocking off 650,000 barrels of oil per day. Bad news for big oil, great news for the climate. Countries and regions that made the high risk bet to balance their budgets based on high oil prices are scrambling, and everyone is absorbing the harsh reminder that oil prices are unstable, unpredictable, and uncertain.
The concepts of stranded assets and unburnable carbon gained even more traction over the past year, with the Governor of the Bank of England saying in no uncertain terms that the majority of fossil fuel reserves are unburnable. This echoed messages from the likes of the International Energy Agency and the World Bank - not exactly environmental activists. The mainstream economic chatter is changing.
On top of this are the people-powered movements calling for divestment from fossil fuels. These campaigns are moving billions; not enough to topple the industry, but enough to command attention and prove that this conversation has the moral magnitude of other historic successful divestment campaigns.
The politics:
Admittedly, this is the slow moving beast. The perpetual challenge is getting politics and politicians to look beyond terms and think about the well being of anything more than 4 or 8 years down the road. Especially when this means turning their backs on the fossil fuel lobby, which has been pouring money into keeping friendly politicians in power for decades.
That said - all hope is not lost. President Obama has made some inspiring and ambitious remarks on climate, and with a final Keystone decision sitting on his desk, recent statements suggest he is poised to make the right call, change the status quo, and reject the pipeline. The climate deal between China and the U.S. is also promising and shifted the global political discussions in a meaningful way. Across the continent, politicians are feeling the heat on their inaction on climate change. In Canada, heading into an election year, poll-leading opposition leaders are starting to backtrack on previous support for major tar sands infrastructure.
The message is starting to penetrate: A failure to act on climate change will have political costs.
The competition:
Renewables are putting a squeeze on fossil fuels. Solar energy had some spectacular breakthroughs in 2014 and the growth in solar capacity in the first three quarters of last year represented 36% of new electricity capacity in the U.S. (compared to 9.6 % in 2012). In Germany, solar generated half of the country's electricity on one day in June, setting both records and precedent for what we can expect from the rapidly improving and increasingly affordable technology.
Other leaps have been made in the sector, with wind and electrification of transport. Low oil prices are an obvious risk to renewables, especially in a world where fossil fuels continue to receive unnecessary subsidies and renewables are forced to play on an uneven playing field (it is high time to Stop Funding Fossils by the way). However, Bloomberg has done some number crunching that suggests that we should not assume that demand for oil would soar with the price drop and analysts are saying that energy markets today are markedly evolved and renewables will hold their own.
Paris:
In late 2015, Paris will host the climate talks, the meeting where global leaders are supposed to hammer out the next big deal. While we are not holding our breath for leaders to rise to the occasion in any spectacular way, one thing we are certain about is that they are going to feel the heat.
--
Let's make 2015 the year that puts an end once and for all to the myth that fossil fuels are an inevitable centerpiece of our future. The real inevitability is an era where Big Oil is no longer the status quo, and where we build our communities, economies, and lives around energy that that is safe, reliable, and clean.
Political revenge. Mass deportations. Project 2025. Unfathomable corruption. Attacks on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Pardons for insurrectionists. An all-out assault on democracy. Republicans in Congress are scrambling to give Trump broad new powers to strip the tax-exempt status of any nonprofit he doesn’t like by declaring it a “terrorist-supporting organization.” Trump has already begun filing lawsuits against news outlets that criticize him. At Common Dreams, we won’t back down, but we must get ready for whatever Trump and his thugs throw at us. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. By donating today, please help us fight the dangers of a second Trump presidency. |
Things don't seem to be getting any easier for Big Oil and I am going to venture a guess that 2015 is going to be their toughest year yet.
Here are a few of the hurdles that are only going to grow for the industry over the coming year:
The science:
You can ignore the science, resist the science, or support politics that doesn't believe in science, but you can't change the science. 2014 captured the title of hottest year on record, marking the 38th consecutive year that global temperatures have been above average. California is still grappling with the impacts of the biggest drought in memory, and "once in a century" storms, floods, fires, and droughts have become a joke as they hit with increasing frequency.
Big Oil can't change the fact that their product is driving dangerous climate change, nor the fact that if the world is going to avoid the worst of it, the majority of fossil fuels that we know exist are going to have to stay underground. The science is definitive and decision makers are running out of ways to avoid taking it seriously.
The people:
People get it. 400,000 of them came to the biggest climate march in history in New York in September with tens of thousands more joining marches in hundreds of cities around the world. Across North America, people are stopping tar sands pipelines. There is not a single major tar sands pipeline that is not threatened by public opposition on the continent, and these delays are making a dent in pollution and are a material risk to fossil fuel expansion.
Driving and inspiring much of this opposition is resistance from people on the front lines of climate change and fossil fuel extraction: First Nations in Alberta standing up to the tar sands, landowners in Nebraska saying no to the inevitable risks of Keystone XL, and vulnerable and impacted communities globally refusing to let climate impacts go unnoticed. This movement is growing by the minute.
The economics:
Even before the precipitous fall of oil prices in late 2014, fossil fuel projects were being cancelled in places like the tar sands and the Arctic Ocean. It is quite simply not great economics to bet the farm on high cost, high risk, and high carbon projects. Even with oil prices over 100$ per barrel in early 2014, three major tar sands projects were mothballed due to uncertain economics (driven in large part by public concern and transportation constraints).
Now, with oil prices a shadow of what they were kicking off 2014, analysts say at least $59 billion dollars of capital is on the brink of deferral in the tar sands over the coming 3 years, with the potential of knocking off 650,000 barrels of oil per day. Bad news for big oil, great news for the climate. Countries and regions that made the high risk bet to balance their budgets based on high oil prices are scrambling, and everyone is absorbing the harsh reminder that oil prices are unstable, unpredictable, and uncertain.
The concepts of stranded assets and unburnable carbon gained even more traction over the past year, with the Governor of the Bank of England saying in no uncertain terms that the majority of fossil fuel reserves are unburnable. This echoed messages from the likes of the International Energy Agency and the World Bank - not exactly environmental activists. The mainstream economic chatter is changing.
On top of this are the people-powered movements calling for divestment from fossil fuels. These campaigns are moving billions; not enough to topple the industry, but enough to command attention and prove that this conversation has the moral magnitude of other historic successful divestment campaigns.
The politics:
Admittedly, this is the slow moving beast. The perpetual challenge is getting politics and politicians to look beyond terms and think about the well being of anything more than 4 or 8 years down the road. Especially when this means turning their backs on the fossil fuel lobby, which has been pouring money into keeping friendly politicians in power for decades.
That said - all hope is not lost. President Obama has made some inspiring and ambitious remarks on climate, and with a final Keystone decision sitting on his desk, recent statements suggest he is poised to make the right call, change the status quo, and reject the pipeline. The climate deal between China and the U.S. is also promising and shifted the global political discussions in a meaningful way. Across the continent, politicians are feeling the heat on their inaction on climate change. In Canada, heading into an election year, poll-leading opposition leaders are starting to backtrack on previous support for major tar sands infrastructure.
The message is starting to penetrate: A failure to act on climate change will have political costs.
The competition:
Renewables are putting a squeeze on fossil fuels. Solar energy had some spectacular breakthroughs in 2014 and the growth in solar capacity in the first three quarters of last year represented 36% of new electricity capacity in the U.S. (compared to 9.6 % in 2012). In Germany, solar generated half of the country's electricity on one day in June, setting both records and precedent for what we can expect from the rapidly improving and increasingly affordable technology.
Other leaps have been made in the sector, with wind and electrification of transport. Low oil prices are an obvious risk to renewables, especially in a world where fossil fuels continue to receive unnecessary subsidies and renewables are forced to play on an uneven playing field (it is high time to Stop Funding Fossils by the way). However, Bloomberg has done some number crunching that suggests that we should not assume that demand for oil would soar with the price drop and analysts are saying that energy markets today are markedly evolved and renewables will hold their own.
Paris:
In late 2015, Paris will host the climate talks, the meeting where global leaders are supposed to hammer out the next big deal. While we are not holding our breath for leaders to rise to the occasion in any spectacular way, one thing we are certain about is that they are going to feel the heat.
--
Let's make 2015 the year that puts an end once and for all to the myth that fossil fuels are an inevitable centerpiece of our future. The real inevitability is an era where Big Oil is no longer the status quo, and where we build our communities, economies, and lives around energy that that is safe, reliable, and clean.
Things don't seem to be getting any easier for Big Oil and I am going to venture a guess that 2015 is going to be their toughest year yet.
Here are a few of the hurdles that are only going to grow for the industry over the coming year:
The science:
You can ignore the science, resist the science, or support politics that doesn't believe in science, but you can't change the science. 2014 captured the title of hottest year on record, marking the 38th consecutive year that global temperatures have been above average. California is still grappling with the impacts of the biggest drought in memory, and "once in a century" storms, floods, fires, and droughts have become a joke as they hit with increasing frequency.
Big Oil can't change the fact that their product is driving dangerous climate change, nor the fact that if the world is going to avoid the worst of it, the majority of fossil fuels that we know exist are going to have to stay underground. The science is definitive and decision makers are running out of ways to avoid taking it seriously.
The people:
People get it. 400,000 of them came to the biggest climate march in history in New York in September with tens of thousands more joining marches in hundreds of cities around the world. Across North America, people are stopping tar sands pipelines. There is not a single major tar sands pipeline that is not threatened by public opposition on the continent, and these delays are making a dent in pollution and are a material risk to fossil fuel expansion.
Driving and inspiring much of this opposition is resistance from people on the front lines of climate change and fossil fuel extraction: First Nations in Alberta standing up to the tar sands, landowners in Nebraska saying no to the inevitable risks of Keystone XL, and vulnerable and impacted communities globally refusing to let climate impacts go unnoticed. This movement is growing by the minute.
The economics:
Even before the precipitous fall of oil prices in late 2014, fossil fuel projects were being cancelled in places like the tar sands and the Arctic Ocean. It is quite simply not great economics to bet the farm on high cost, high risk, and high carbon projects. Even with oil prices over 100$ per barrel in early 2014, three major tar sands projects were mothballed due to uncertain economics (driven in large part by public concern and transportation constraints).
Now, with oil prices a shadow of what they were kicking off 2014, analysts say at least $59 billion dollars of capital is on the brink of deferral in the tar sands over the coming 3 years, with the potential of knocking off 650,000 barrels of oil per day. Bad news for big oil, great news for the climate. Countries and regions that made the high risk bet to balance their budgets based on high oil prices are scrambling, and everyone is absorbing the harsh reminder that oil prices are unstable, unpredictable, and uncertain.
The concepts of stranded assets and unburnable carbon gained even more traction over the past year, with the Governor of the Bank of England saying in no uncertain terms that the majority of fossil fuel reserves are unburnable. This echoed messages from the likes of the International Energy Agency and the World Bank - not exactly environmental activists. The mainstream economic chatter is changing.
On top of this are the people-powered movements calling for divestment from fossil fuels. These campaigns are moving billions; not enough to topple the industry, but enough to command attention and prove that this conversation has the moral magnitude of other historic successful divestment campaigns.
The politics:
Admittedly, this is the slow moving beast. The perpetual challenge is getting politics and politicians to look beyond terms and think about the well being of anything more than 4 or 8 years down the road. Especially when this means turning their backs on the fossil fuel lobby, which has been pouring money into keeping friendly politicians in power for decades.
That said - all hope is not lost. President Obama has made some inspiring and ambitious remarks on climate, and with a final Keystone decision sitting on his desk, recent statements suggest he is poised to make the right call, change the status quo, and reject the pipeline. The climate deal between China and the U.S. is also promising and shifted the global political discussions in a meaningful way. Across the continent, politicians are feeling the heat on their inaction on climate change. In Canada, heading into an election year, poll-leading opposition leaders are starting to backtrack on previous support for major tar sands infrastructure.
The message is starting to penetrate: A failure to act on climate change will have political costs.
The competition:
Renewables are putting a squeeze on fossil fuels. Solar energy had some spectacular breakthroughs in 2014 and the growth in solar capacity in the first three quarters of last year represented 36% of new electricity capacity in the U.S. (compared to 9.6 % in 2012). In Germany, solar generated half of the country's electricity on one day in June, setting both records and precedent for what we can expect from the rapidly improving and increasingly affordable technology.
Other leaps have been made in the sector, with wind and electrification of transport. Low oil prices are an obvious risk to renewables, especially in a world where fossil fuels continue to receive unnecessary subsidies and renewables are forced to play on an uneven playing field (it is high time to Stop Funding Fossils by the way). However, Bloomberg has done some number crunching that suggests that we should not assume that demand for oil would soar with the price drop and analysts are saying that energy markets today are markedly evolved and renewables will hold their own.
Paris:
In late 2015, Paris will host the climate talks, the meeting where global leaders are supposed to hammer out the next big deal. While we are not holding our breath for leaders to rise to the occasion in any spectacular way, one thing we are certain about is that they are going to feel the heat.
--
Let's make 2015 the year that puts an end once and for all to the myth that fossil fuels are an inevitable centerpiece of our future. The real inevitability is an era where Big Oil is no longer the status quo, and where we build our communities, economies, and lives around energy that that is safe, reliable, and clean.
"I ask you to have mercy, Mr. President, on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away," said the Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde.
The inaugural interfaith service at the Washington National Cathedral on Tuesday proceeded with the usual prayers and music, but after delivering her sermon, the Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde appeared to go off-script and made a direct appeal to President Donald Trump.
Recalling the Republican president's assertion on Monday that he was "saved by God" after a bullet hit his ear in an assassination attempt in July, Budde asked Trump, who was seated in the church, "in the name of our God... to have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now."
"There are gay, lesbian, and transgender children in Democratic, Republican, and Independent families," said Budde, "some who fear for their lives. And the people who pick our crops and clean our office buildings, who labor in poultry farms and meatpacking plants, who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants and work the night shifts in hospitals. They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals."
"I ask you to have mercy, Mr. President, on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away, and that you help those fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands to find compassion and welcome here," said Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, D.C.
Budde's appeal followed Trump's signing of 26 executive orders in his first day in office, with dozens more expected in the first days of his second term. The president signed orders ending birthright citizenship—provoking legal challenges from immigrant rights groups and state attorneys general—and pausing refugee admissions, leading to devastation among people who had been waiting for asylum appointments at ports of entry. Official proclamations declared a national emergency at the southern border and asserted that the entry of migrants there is an "invasion."
Trump also took executive action to declare that the federal government recognizes only two sexes, male and female.
"May God grant us the strength and courage to honor the dignity of every human being, to speak the truth to one another in love, and walk humbly with each other and our God for the good of all people in this nation and the world," said Budde in her address to Trump.
The president kept his eyes on Budde for much of her speech, at one point looking annoyed and casting his eyes downward. Vice President JD Vance leaned over and spoke to his wife, Usha Vance, as Budde talked about undocumented immigrants, and raised his eyebrows when she said the majority of immigrants are not criminals.
Trump later told reporters that the service was "not too exciting."
"I didn't think it was a good service," he said. "They can do much better."
Democratic strategist Keith Edwards applauded Budde's decision to speak directly to the president, calling her "incredibly brave."
Budde "confronted Trump's fascism to his face," he said on the social media platform Bluesky.
The study was published as President Donald Trump was blasted for an executive order that one critic said shows he wants to turn the Alaskan Arctic into the "the world's largest gas station."
For thousands of years, the land areas of the Arctic have served as a "carbon sink," storing potential carbon emissions in the permafrost. But according to a study published in the journal Nature Climate Change Tuesday, more than 34% of the Arctic is now a source of carbon to the atmosphere, as permafrost melts and the Arctic becomes greener.
"When emissions from fire were added, the percentage grew to 40%," according to the Woodwell Climate Research Center, which led the international team that conducted the research.
The study, which was first reported on by The Guardian, was released the day after President Donald Trump issued multiple presidential actions influencing the United States' ability to confront the climate crisis, which is primarily caused by fossil fuel emissions, including one directly impacting resource extraction in Alaska, a section of which is within the Arctic Circle.
Sue Natali, one of the researchers who worked on the study published in Nature Climate Change, told NPR in December (in reference to similar research) that the Arctic's warming "is not an issue of what party you support."
"This is something that impacts everyone," she said.
As the permafrost—ground that remains frozen for two or more years—holds less carbon, it releases CO2 into the atmosphere that could "considerably exacerbate climate change," according to the study.
"There is a load of carbon in the Arctic soils. It's close to half of the Earth's soil carbon pool. That's much more than there is in the atmosphere. There's a huge potential reservoir that should ideally stay in the ground," said Anna Virkkala, the lead author of the study, in an interview with The Guardian.
The dire warning was released on the heels of Trump's executive order titled "Unleashing the Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential" that calls for expedited "permitting and leasing of energy and natural resource projects in Alaska," as well as for the prioritization of "development of Alaska's liquefied natural gas (LNG) potential, including the sale and transportation of Alaskan LNG to other regions of the United States and allied nations within the Pacific region."
The order also rolls back a number of Biden-era restrictions on drilling and extraction in Alaska, which included protecting areas within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from oil and gas leasing.
"Alaska is warming four times faster than the rest of the planet, a trend that is wreaking havoc on communities, ecosystems, fish, wildlife, and ways of life that depend on healthy lands and waters," said Carole Holley, managing attorney for the Alaska Office of the environmental group Earthjustice, in a statement Monday.
"Earthjustice and its clients will not stand idly by while Trump once again forces a harmful industry-driven agenda on our state for political gain and the benefit of a wealthy few," she added.
Trump wants to turn the Alaskan Arctic into the "the world's largest gas station," said Athan Manuel, director of Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, in a statement Monday. "Make no mistake, Trump's rushed and sloppy actions today are an existential threat to these lands and waters, and the communities and wildlife that depend on them."
The U.N. ambassador nominee also shrugged off the Nazi salutes made by Elon Musk on Inauguration Day.
As U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik faced questioning by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday regarding her nomination for a top diplomatic position, the rights group Jewish Voice for Peace Action called on lawmakers to consider her "record of antisemitic, anti-Palestinian, anti-immigrant, and anti-democracy rhetoric and policy" and block her confirmation.
Stefanik's (R-N.Y.) record was reinforced at the hearing as she was asked about her views on Palestine, expressions of antisemitism in the United States, and far-right Israeli leaders' political agenda, with Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) recalling a meeting he had with the congresswoman after President Donald Trump nominated her to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
At the meeting, Van Hollen said, Stefanik had expressed support for the idea that Israel has a Biblical right to control the entire West Bank—a position that is held by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and former National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, but runs counter to the two-state solution that the U.S. government has long supported.
"Is that your view today?" asked Van Hollen, to which Stefanik replied, "Yes."
Van Hollen noted that Stefanik's viewpoint also flies in the face of numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions and international consensus about the Middle East conflict.
"If the president is going to succeed at bringing peace and stability to the Middle East, we're going to have to look at the U.N. Security Council resolutions," said the senator. "And it's going to be very difficult to achieve that if you continue to hold the view that you just expressed, which is a view that was not held by the founders of the state of Israel."
Stefanik also refused to answer a direct question from Van Hollen regarding whether Palestinian people have the right to self-determination, saying only that she supports "human rights for all" and pivoting to a call for Israeli hostages to be released by Hamas.
Jenin Younes, litigation counsel with the New Civil Liberties Alliance, said Stefanik expressed "religious fanaticism, pure and simple" at the confirmation hearing—which was held as Israeli settlers and soldiers ramped up attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank.
"That [Stefanik] will now play a major role with respect to our foreign policy in the region is terrifying," said Younes.
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) Action noted that in addition to supporting "the Israeli government's brutal genocide of Palestinians," Stefanik has also "amplified the antisemitic Great Replacement theory"—which claims the influence and power of white Christian Americans is being deliberately diminished by Jewish Americans and immigration policy.
Despite her support for the debunked conspiracy theory, Stefanik made headlines last year for her accusations against college students, faculty, and administrators over the pro-Palestinian demonstrations that exploded across campuses as Americans spoke out against Israel's U.S.-backed assault on Gaza. The congresswoman said the protests were expressions of antisemitism and pushed for the resignation of university leaders who declined to discipline students who spoke out against Israel.
The hearings where Stefanik lambasted college leaders "were part of a broader campaign to silence anti-war activism and dissent on college campuses while forwarding the MAGA culture war campaign against [diversity, equity, and inclusion], critical race theory, and LGBTQ+ rights," said JVP Action.
An exchange between Stefanik and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday also raised questions over Stefanik's views on antisemitism. Murphy asked the nominee about the Nazi salute twice displayed by billionaire Trump backer Elon Musk—whom the president has named to lead his proposed Department of Government Efficiency—at an event Monday night.
" Elon Musk did not do those salutes," Stefanik asserted.
Murphy countered by reading several comments from right-wing commentators who applauded Musk's "Heil Hitler" salute.
"Over and over again last night, white supremacist groups and neo-Nazi groups in this country rallied around that visual," said Murphy.
JVP Action said Stefanik has "deeply embraced Trump's anti-democratic agenda."
"Her nomination must be blocked," said the group.