The United Nations’ recent announcement to completely end reliance on fossil fuels across the world has faced heavy criticism from U.S. energy experts, who argue that the agreement could jeopardize American national and energy security. The agreement was made during the U.N.’s COP28 climate summit in Dubai, where delegates negotiated commitments related to future fossil fuel usage and other climate-related priorities. While the deal was hailed as a significant move towards climate action, critics question its feasibility and potential consequences.
American Energy Institute CEO, Jason Isaac, expressed concern over the U.N.’s attempt to bribe countries into phasing out fossil fuels without providing realistic alternatives for the products and energy that these hydrocarbons produce. Isaac argues that billions of people around the world rely on fossil fuels for reliable electricity and that the U.N.’s focus on projected temperature changes is fearmongering.
Furthermore, critics highlight the Biden administration’s blind eye towards Iranian oil sanctions, allowing the flow of oil to China, which is now refining diesel and jet fuel. This raises questions about the effectiveness of the agreement in reducing global carbon emissions if major players like China continue to rely on fossil fuels.
Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, who led the U.S. delegation at the summit, defended the agreement as a significant step towards addressing climate change. However, experts raise concerns about the history of nations failing to meet previous U.N. climate objectives and agreements, casting doubt on the effectiveness of this new agreement.
The COP28 agreement aims to limit global warming to just 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and includes commitments such as tripling renewable energy capacity by 2030, shutting down coal-fired power generation, promoting electric vehicles, endorsing carbon capture technology, and discontinuing fossil fuel subsidies.
Critics argue that the agreement lacks enforceable commitments to cut emissions or fossil fuel use and fails to address the issue of rich countries providing financial assistance to poorer nations for climate initiatives. They also point out the irony of Azerbaijan, an oil-producing country, hosting next year’s COP29 summit, suggesting that the continued reliance on fossil fuels and emissions will persist.
Power the Future, an organization advocating for energy workers, highlights recent setbacks in green energy development in the U.S., including the cancellation of a major offshore wind project and Ford Motor Co.’s decision to scale back electric vehicle production. These setbacks, according to critics, undermine the credibility of the agreement and suggest that it serves as a platform for Joe Biden’s war on American energy.
Overall, critics view the COP28 agreement as a do-nothing agreement that allows Biden to continue his pursuit of an anti-fossil fuel agenda while providing a platform for unelected bureaucrats to showcase their commitment to climate change. The concerns raised by experts and industry insiders highlight the potential harm to U.S. energy security and the need for realistic alternatives before phasing out fossil fuels entirely.
Thomas Catenacci is a politics writer for Digital, providing the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews, and more politics content.
