Should the US and other Countries continue to explore for and develop new oil and gas fields?
Transitioning away from fossil fuels is challenging; many countries do not yet have viable alternatives. This article questions the United States' commitment to reducing or eliminating its dependence on fossil fuels.
From The Guardian: "Surge of new US-led oil and gas activity threatens to wreck Paris climate goals."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/28/oil-and-gas-fossil-fuels-report?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
I believe that, instead of investing in a negatively impactful form of energy, America should move toward nuclear energy. In the past, nuclear power plants have been a bit of a sore subject, one could say. They have been notoriously unreliable and unsafe because of a lack of knowledge surrounding this resource. Nowadays, we are fully capable of making and keeping safe energy, a form of energy that creates far lower carbon emissions than any other. As it is, nuclear energy accounts for only 20% of America's energy, a measly amount when it comes to the total energy required for our constantly evolving and technology focused culture. Thus, I believe America needs to stop putting manpower into developing new oil fields and should instead put more money into nuclear energy. https://www.energy.gov/nuclear#:~:text=Nuclear%20power%2C%20the%20use%20of,to%20support%20national%20defense%20activities.
ReplyDeleteI honestly believe that stopping countries like the U.S. and other European countries from extracting oil is impossible. As said by the article, "Already operating oil and gas infrastructure will be enough to push the world beyond 1.5C and the extra activity planned will only further raise the global temperature." This essentially means that the only way to realistically solve this global crisis is to stop most of, if not all oil and gas extraction. This solution would be nearly impossible to do in today's climate in which oil and gas are paramount to the country. I think the problem of global warming definitely needs to be solved, although I believe that this solution of stopping oil and gas extraction would be very unrealistic. I believe that due to America and other big oil giants heavily relying on the extraction of these fossil fuels would cause too many issues. If oil extraction were to end, would countries then have a finite amount of oil in supply? Would these countries who need oil, target oil giants like America for their resources?
ReplyDeleteThis video by Bloomberg TV: https://youtu.be/JfCXN1CpDTg?si=C4q4DACuApTaiH6p
Highlights the reasons why we are going to need oil for a considerably long amount of time. Long enough to the point that divesting from fossil fuels now in search of new fuel would pose technical implications on the overall wellbeing of a country.
Stopping the production of oil and gas fields seems very difficult and a process that seems impossible to stop the process of. As I have read, as of now there is limited space for new oil and gas fields which does stop the production of oil and gas fields. As I have looked at the website, IISD, they stated that, "There is now a growing consensus that coal should no longer be used to generate power after 2030 in developed countries and after 2040 or 2050 in developing countries." This is a very long stretch of time, but the cut down of this would lead to phasing out of oil production and gas production. But, these countries that are doing this process that don't have the correct financial support, will need more financial support to help stop the process of oil fields and oil production.
ReplyDeleteSlowing down and stopping oil and gas production is a daunting challenge that needs immediate attention. If we don't stop mining and using oil, the climate crisis will be unsolvable. I found a great video on predicting how our planet will look in the upcoming years if we don't do anything about the climate crisis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2njn71TqkjA - this video by Ted-Ed gives us a great prediction of how our planet and life will look in the future, and it sure is bleak. Hundreds of millions will be displaced, pushed into starvation, there will be major heat waves, natural disasters, etc. If we don't stop using fossil fuels and switch to a better source of energy like solar power now, it will be too late for us.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a really complex topic. The oil and gas industry is very important to a lot of economies and moving away from it can have a lot of issues. At the same time this industry is seriously impacting our climate and changing where we get energy from will really help solve a lot of problems. I think we really need to look into nuclear energy more, although I understand that it makes a lot of people nervous. https://www.voanews.com/a/global-leaders-push-for-nuclear-energy-revival-/7537219.html
ReplyDeleteMoving away from fossil fuels is a really complex subject and is also really hard to do. Its easy to say that transitioning to renewable energy is a safer alternative for the environment. However, it is uncertain whether or not these alternatives are more effective for long-term use. For example, you can store fuel, but its hard to store electricity or solar. On that note, Electricity, Wind, and Solar are weather dependent while fuel can be acquired anytime.
ReplyDeleteNow obviously production of fossil fuels is harmful to the environment. It emits lots of carbon that is absorbed into the atmosphere and heats up the planet. That is why I am advocating for the use of Biofuel deriving from forest products. Although deforestation contributes to climate change negatively, it is a carbon-neutral way of producing fuel because the photosynthesis in plants takes in the same amount of carbon that was release by the forest stand that was cut down for the use of fuel.
I found this article from the national renewable energy laboratory, and it explains how biofuel is a solution to climate change
Deletehttps://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy99osti/24052.pdf
The report's findings are alarming: there's a big increase in new oil and gas projects that seriously threaten global climate goals. Despite clear warnings from the International Energy Agency and scientists, countries and big fossil fuel companies are going ahead with plans that could push global heating past the critical 1.5C mark. The US is leading this surge, aiming to almost quadruple oil and gas extraction by the end of the decade. This focus on fossil fuels undermines efforts to fight climate change and ignores the urgent need for renewable energy. If this expansion continues unchecked, it could make the already bad impacts of climate change much worse.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the solution to this problem is clean energy. Looking at things such as hydropower could be the cure to the disease of global warming. Instead of focusing our attention on finding new fields, I believe we should focus on investing in these new opportunities.
ReplyDeleteI understand the importance of oil and gas for the economy, so in that sense, I feel as though they should still exist to a capacity. I do feel as though as each decade passes, countries should make an attempt to slowly lean off the crutch the oil and gas industry provides. I believe that the development of more readily available and accessible sources of clean energy should be a priority. This is actually the main reason why I am an engineering major. For a while, I've had the desire to find a way to develop ways to make more accessible clean renewable energy. Especially for countries where access to electricity and gas is hard for those who are less fortunate. The switch isn't easy and I feel as though an abrupt stop of oil and gas would do more harm than good, but a gradual decrease in its use is the best possible solution.
ReplyDeleteThe US has had plenty of ways to convert to more renewable forms of energy, but we still are investing in fossil fuels. It shows the government clear disregard for the environment, with a sole focus on profit. The situation is similar in Indonesia, where they have alternatives to fossil fuels, and have said they are going to transition away from coal power, but then proceed to built more coal power plants.
ReplyDelete