We Need a Plan to End the Fossil Fuel Industry

Our net zero plans are not getting us anywhere… This isn’t me falling into the trap of climate doomism because it is true.

Our downfall will be our cruel optimism of net zero and how many of us have come to believe that it is the solution to our climate crisis. In an article I recently wrote, I talked about how our naivety in believing the net zero rhetoric will lock the planet into a permanent condition where fossil fuels continue forever. We cannot let this happen.

The significance of the fossil fuel industry to our environment

The IPCC has determined that the use of fossil fuels is the primary source of global warming, accounting for 89% of CO2 emissions from industry and fossil fuels in 2018. To achieve a maximum temperature increase of 1.5°C, it is crucial to either decrease or cease the usage of fossil fuels and reach net zero CO2 emissions worldwide by 2050.

Why isn’t our current trajectory favourable?

The prevailing notion is that the shift to renewable energy will happen naturally with some guidance from the government. With the addition of net zero commitments made by approximately 4,000 governments and businesses globally, it seems the process has already begun. Right?

However, the numbers just do not add up… The book Ending Fossil Fuels, by Holly Jean Buck, mentioned the numerous targets that need to be met to avoid crossing the 1.5°C boundary.

“fossil fuel plants will have to be retired before the end of their life; internal combustion engines in automobiles will have to be taken off the road; gas stoves will have to be removed from houses; industrial facilities will have to be retrofitted.”

With these in mind, concrete plans are often either missing or at odds with the goals.

Fossil fuel companies who have also pledged to go net zero, for example, are still investing trillions in fossil fuel production and exploration. A clear sign that they’re not stopping.

Contrary to expectations, these corporations plan to boost production by 2% each year. However, science indicates that to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C, a 6% yearly reduction in fossil fuel production is required in this decade.

Buck puts it like this, “What are we to make of this discrepancy between the sensibility that the end is coming and the reality of planned production?”

Arguments for planned phase-out

It can be difficult to convince some people that a planned phase-out of fossil fuels has to happen to have a semblance of a healthy planet. Here are three convincing arguments mentioned in the book, Ending Fossil Fuels, that can make a convincing case for planning phaseout to different audiences with different interests.

1. The public health & environmental justice argument

8.7 million deaths. That is how many people have died from outdoor air pollution caused by fossil fuels. That almost accounts for 1 in 5 deaths in 2018. The focus on net-zero emissions masks these harms, which are experienced disproportionately by people of colour and the poor.

One perspective is that cleaner fossil fuel production methods can be achieved through reform.

However, the counterargument is that these companies had ample opportunity to improve their practices and instead chose to resist change by investing heavily in lobbying. As a result, they have lost the trust necessary to dictate their own phase-out plan.

2. The suffocating innovation argument

It can also be argued that fossil fuel companies have a history of hindering progress. Their influence has prevented the implementation and growth of more advanced technology, due to their entrenched political power in the industry.

3. The rebalancing power & ending corruption argument

The argument against fossil fuels goes beyond just their impact on the climate. Terminating their use also means ending the forms of power they enable, including their association with oppression and degradation. It is well known that they have sustained corruption and authoritarian regimes. Ending their use could result in a loss of power for these regimes.

…

“Phasing out fossil fuels requires a democratic planning capacity, and, in developing it, we can also develop the planning and political power to phase out other things that kill or harm people and ecosystems. We will need that capacity to make it through this century and beyond.” — Holly Jean Buck

—

This post was previously published on medium.com.

***