Why Activists Are Pushing a ‘Supply Side’ Strategy for Fighting Climate Change

by Chris Mooney (The Washington Post) Even as President Obama further amplifies his rhetoric about addressing climate change, a coalition of environmental organizations released a letter Monday seeking to push his administration much further still. Not content with recently announced curbs on emissions from fossil fuel fired power plants, the groups want the president to use his authority to stop new leases for the development of fossil fuels in public lands and waters — a dramatic change in policy that would not only affect major companies but could also decrease future federal revenue collected from these leases.

“Here at home, the longstanding U.S. policy of leasing federal public lands and oceans to corporations for coal, oil and gas extraction must end,” the statement reads. “As the world focuses on climate change in advance of negotiations in Paris this winter, we urge you to demonstrate strong climate leadership by stopping new leasing of our publicly owned fossil fuels.”

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, sales of fossil fuels produced on U.S. public land in 2014 included 651 million barrels of crude oil, 3,551 billion cubic feet of natural gas, and 402 million short tons of coal.

The statement is signed by a coalition of green groups, including the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, 350.org, Friends of the Earth, Rainforest Action Network, and the Center for Biological Diversity, as well as numerous individuals. Notably, some other leading green groups, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Environmental Defense Fund, are not signatories, ...

Hints of the theme were also apparent when, during President Obama’s recent Alaska trip to highlight climate change, many environmentalists faulted the president for the administration’s approval of Shell’s drilling plans in the Arctic. “His recent trip to Alaska, he didn’t even mention Arctic drilling,” said Ruth Breech, a campaigner with the Rainforest Action Network who helped organize the new statement. “This omission is just amazing. He’s up there talking about the climate crisis but he’s not talking about how he just approved and opened up a new carbon reserve.”

But in fact, the rift is of long standing — for a number of years, many environmental groups have simultaneously praised the president’s climate steps but also faulted his continual reliance on an “all of the above” energy strategy that supports the development of U.S. fossil fuel resources as well as renewables.

As a broader justification for this “supply side strategy,” green groups often cite research suggesting that a large proportion of current fossil fuel reserves would have to remain unburned if the world is to have a serious chance of keeping warming below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, a widely agreed upon international target.

Indeed, a study published last week found that if humans burn all available fossil fuel reserves, the emissions would be sufficient to entirely melt the gigantic ice covered continent of Antarctica, triggering over 100 feet of sea level rise. READ MORE and MORE (Huffington Post) and MORE (360.0rg)

Excerpt from 360.org: U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell issued comments dismissing the idea as an “oversimplification,” arguing “you can’t just cut it off overnight.” In response, 350.org Executive Director May Boeve issued the following statement:

“This is a straw man, and Secretary Jewell knows it. Absolutely no one is suggesting that we can end society’s reliance on fossil fuel use tomorrow, but that’s no excuse for failing to do our part today. If we’re serious about transitioning to an economy powered by 100% renewables, we need to stop digging for more, and green-lighting projects like Keystone XL that prolong our dependence on fossil fuels.

Let’s be clear: fossil fuel companies already hold way more in reserves than our world can safely burn, and more than enough to cover US consumption as we make the transition to a clean economy. That leaves no good reason why our government should continue to let massive corporations mine taxpayer land for even more that science tells us they can’t burn.

Here’s the bottom line: the Obama Administration’s signature achievement on climate change cuts 5 gigatons of pollution by 2030 — while 450 gigatons sit beneath publicly owned water and soil. Banning fossil fuel extraction on public lands won’t solve the problem by itself, but it has to happen if we’re serious about a solution. It’s the perfect opportunity for the Obama administration to take a historic step and align its actions with the rhetoric.” READ MORE