By Helen Gloege ’23
Staff Writer
Photo courtesy of WikiMedia Commons.
President Biden took office in January of this year, one of his stated priorities was addressing climate change and the impacts of this are already becoming apparent. The day Biden took office, he canceled the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline’s purpose was to transport crude oil from Western Canada to Nebraska. It was proposed in 2008 and vetoed by the Obama administration in November 2015. This was believed to be the end of the pipeline; however, immediately after taking office in 2016, Donald Trump signed an executive order to continue the pipeline.
Both the pipeline and its cancellation have incited controversy. Alberta, Canada invested over $1 billion in the project with the promise it would be completed. After the cancellation, attorneys general from over 21 states have sued to overturn the decision. The pipeline itself has become a money sink, as the cost increased from $5.4 to $9 billion due to the extended nature of the process. Oil prices simultaneously decreased, meaning less money would be recouped from the pipeline than originally thought. It was not Biden but rather TC Energy, a Canadian company, who ultimately terminated the project after reviewing their options and consulting with Alberta’s government. The company plans on working with stakeholders, regulators and Indigenous groups for a safe exit from the pipeline.
Despite the Biden administration’s promise to prioritize tackling the climate crisis, the administration has also thrown its support behind the Willow oil project. The Willow oil project is a major oil drilling development in the National Petroleum Reserve — Alaska run by the oil company ConocoPhillips. The project is also facilitated by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In a court case involving Indigenous groups looking to stop the project, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a legal brief arguing in support of the project. The department claimed the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service followed all environmental laws.
At its peak, the Willow project is expected to produce over 100,000 barrels of oil per day and approximately 600 million barrels over 30 years. Supporters claim the project will create jobs and support American energy production. Opponents argue the development will threaten wildlife, impede subsistence hunters from the nearby village of Nuiqsut and lead to the production of more climate-warming greenhouse gases.
Various other countries are responding to climate change reckonings through tighter restrictions on fossil fuel companies. The Supreme Court of the Netherlands directed oil company Royal Dutch Shell to cut most of their greenhouse gas emissions within the next 10 years. This decision could prove to be a major victory for the climate justice movement as Royal Dutch Shell is the largest company in the Netherlands and the world’s largest private oil trader. According to The New York Times, “it was the first time a court ordered a private company to, in effect, change its business practice on climate grounds.” Shell plans on appealing the court decision, but the process may take years. The Netherlands’ national judiciary has a strong reputation when it comes to climate litigation. In 2019, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands ordered the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions, a landmark case in that it held a national government accountable for addressing climate change.
Courts are increasingly a means to oppose fossil fuels both abroad and in the U.S. Since 2017, about 20 U.S. cities, counties and states have sued the fossil fuel industry for the local costs of climate change. In Australia, a judge cautioned the government against a proposed coal mine expansion, saying they needed to ensure the mine wouldn’t harm the health of local children. In Peru, Saúl Luciano Lliuya, a farmer, is currently suing a German energy company for their responsibility in fueling global warming. Lliuya argues that the greenhouse gas emissions from the German energy company were to blame for the melting of the Palcaraju glacier that is causing the increase of water levels in Lake Palcacocha. The increase in the lake’s water level threatens to flood his home and many others nearby. Germany’s supreme court is also pushing the government to toughen climate goals to protect future generations.
Domestically, fossil fuel companies are struggling with shareholders looking to move away from fossil fuels. At its annual shareholder meeting, Exxon Mobil faced pressure to move away from oil and gas for financial reasons. Chevron shareholders also asked the company to reduce their emissions and those produced by customers that use Chevron. Shareholders across the industry are doubtful companies will continue to profit without phasing out oil and gas.
As pressures on corporations and governments increase through legislation and the court systems, committed individuals and citizen groups are leading the charge. Actions taken against fossil fuels have been inspired by or credited to small groups of people — for example, the Australian coal mine expansion was challenged by eight teenagers and an 86-year-old nun. The future of the climate crisis is increasingly in the hands of people from diverse backgrounds.