Thank you SO MUCH for doing this work. Ugh ugh ugh. Politico Pro's comment about not vetting ads to be factually accurate is especially abhorrent. WTF?!
Also, I particularly loved this: "“It's an absolute tried-and-tested argument within the disinformation playbook to constantly create more interim milestones before we achieve what a real necessary transition looks like,” said King, who works at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue." I currently work in the building code space, trying to get equitable access to EV charging for multi-family residents, and the sanctimonious excuses for foot-dragging 'interim milestones' on the part of the entrenched power players ("we need to move slowly because builders need to get used to these things") is patently misleading and maddeningly effective. Not surprising to see that it's part of a bigger policy playbook!
I think it is clear, as this excellent reporting shows, that the goal of fossil fuel companies, whose business is natural gas, is to make the transition to clean energy as slow as possible any way they can to maximize the production and selling of natural gas. And part of that will be trying to convince people about its supposed climate benefits.
But I read something this:
"There’s an honest debate over how to effectively transition global energy usage to renewables, including the use of natural gas in combination with carbon capture and storage."
And just get frustrated. Because I want that debate, but we never ever seem to actually have it. And when the clear limitations of renewables and obstacles of trying to solve the intermittency problem of wind and solar is brought up by people like myself, it suddenly isn't a debate anymore but a solved problem only limited by policy implementation. So you have environmental groups like Friends of the Earth, working against people like me who are trying to keep massive amounts of clean energy online.
Which actually gives room for natural gas producers to market their product because they then fill that intermittency gap with fossil fuels, which is exactly what will happen if Diablo Canyon closes.
To be clear, I'm not saying HEATED needs to take some leading role on the debate here, but it is just more my frustrations with the climate movement more broadly in not being committed to solving this debate as quickly as possible. Because until this debate is solved, fossil fuels like natural gas will continue to have an opportunity to market itself here.
I hope HEATED can at least agree it is sink or swim time for renewables, because as is pointed out in the article, natural gas isn't a solution here.
As always thank you for the wonderful in depth reporting.
Hello, my name if Perry Lindstrom. I worked at EIA from 1993 until I retired at the end of 2021. It would be remiss of me if I didn't comment on this issue given that I created some of the data reports mentioned here. I would caution against taking 2021 data out of context. In 2020, CO2 emissions fell 11%, so even with the 7% increase, emissions are below the 2019 level of 5.1billion metric tons. A better example for natural gas is 2018. Because natural gas is both a heating fuel and a fuel for electricity generation, 2018 put a lot of upward pressure on natural gas consumption and emissions because it was both a colder heating season and a warmer cooling season than 2017. Natural gas emissions rose 10.6%. Coal emissions fell 4.2%, but with petroleum rising 2.0%, overall CO2 increased 2.9%, reversing a trend of declines from 2015 to 2017. The whole issue of fugitive methane emissions is highly nuanced and it has been a debate in the emissions counting community for several years. I don't think there is enough space for me to go into it here, but I should point out that there are fugitive emissions associated with coal that may be under-counted too. Anyhow, I'm a supporter of Heated and I do agree with the gist of this issue. I have started my own Substack at perrylindstrom.substack.com. I mix some personal memoir materials into it to hopefully soften the geek factor. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Perry
Anecdotal, but the idea that fossil gas can be "renewable" is infiltrating the utilities too. A company I know has issued an RFP to review coal replacement options and includes fossil gas + carbon capture alongside other renewable options like wind and solar. This media push is unfortunately working.
As soon as I saw the name Heidi Heitkamp, I was immediately suspicious. Turns out it was for good reason.
This has the look and feel of a legitimate story, which means it's irresponsible from both an environmental and journalistic perspective. Beyond disappointing.
Thank you SO MUCH for doing this work. Ugh ugh ugh. Politico Pro's comment about not vetting ads to be factually accurate is especially abhorrent. WTF?!
Also, I particularly loved this: "“It's an absolute tried-and-tested argument within the disinformation playbook to constantly create more interim milestones before we achieve what a real necessary transition looks like,” said King, who works at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue." I currently work in the building code space, trying to get equitable access to EV charging for multi-family residents, and the sanctimonious excuses for foot-dragging 'interim milestones' on the part of the entrenched power players ("we need to move slowly because builders need to get used to these things") is patently misleading and maddeningly effective. Not surprising to see that it's part of a bigger policy playbook!
I think it is clear, as this excellent reporting shows, that the goal of fossil fuel companies, whose business is natural gas, is to make the transition to clean energy as slow as possible any way they can to maximize the production and selling of natural gas. And part of that will be trying to convince people about its supposed climate benefits.
But I read something this:
"There’s an honest debate over how to effectively transition global energy usage to renewables, including the use of natural gas in combination with carbon capture and storage."
And just get frustrated. Because I want that debate, but we never ever seem to actually have it. And when the clear limitations of renewables and obstacles of trying to solve the intermittency problem of wind and solar is brought up by people like myself, it suddenly isn't a debate anymore but a solved problem only limited by policy implementation. So you have environmental groups like Friends of the Earth, working against people like me who are trying to keep massive amounts of clean energy online.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/diablo-canyon-license-extension-unlawful-nuclear-commission-told-2023-02-14/
Which actually gives room for natural gas producers to market their product because they then fill that intermittency gap with fossil fuels, which is exactly what will happen if Diablo Canyon closes.
To be clear, I'm not saying HEATED needs to take some leading role on the debate here, but it is just more my frustrations with the climate movement more broadly in not being committed to solving this debate as quickly as possible. Because until this debate is solved, fossil fuels like natural gas will continue to have an opportunity to market itself here.
I hope HEATED can at least agree it is sink or swim time for renewables, because as is pointed out in the article, natural gas isn't a solution here.
As always thank you for the wonderful in depth reporting.
This is infuriating! Thank you for keeping on top of this. These people rely on Americans’ utter ignorance of systems thinking. 😬🙄
Hello, my name if Perry Lindstrom. I worked at EIA from 1993 until I retired at the end of 2021. It would be remiss of me if I didn't comment on this issue given that I created some of the data reports mentioned here. I would caution against taking 2021 data out of context. In 2020, CO2 emissions fell 11%, so even with the 7% increase, emissions are below the 2019 level of 5.1billion metric tons. A better example for natural gas is 2018. Because natural gas is both a heating fuel and a fuel for electricity generation, 2018 put a lot of upward pressure on natural gas consumption and emissions because it was both a colder heating season and a warmer cooling season than 2017. Natural gas emissions rose 10.6%. Coal emissions fell 4.2%, but with petroleum rising 2.0%, overall CO2 increased 2.9%, reversing a trend of declines from 2015 to 2017. The whole issue of fugitive methane emissions is highly nuanced and it has been a debate in the emissions counting community for several years. I don't think there is enough space for me to go into it here, but I should point out that there are fugitive emissions associated with coal that may be under-counted too. Anyhow, I'm a supporter of Heated and I do agree with the gist of this issue. I have started my own Substack at perrylindstrom.substack.com. I mix some personal memoir materials into it to hopefully soften the geek factor. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Perry
Anecdotal, but the idea that fossil gas can be "renewable" is infiltrating the utilities too. A company I know has issued an RFP to review coal replacement options and includes fossil gas + carbon capture alongside other renewable options like wind and solar. This media push is unfortunately working.
As soon as I saw the name Heidi Heitkamp, I was immediately suspicious. Turns out it was for good reason.
This has the look and feel of a legitimate story, which means it's irresponsible from both an environmental and journalistic perspective. Beyond disappointing.