“Ethical Markets agrees with this assessment of the deep fossil dependence now driving both climate disasters and the horrors Putin is continuing to inflict on Ukrainian members of our human family. Bullies like Putin cannot be appeased. See steps all more fortunate peoples can do:
“STOP PUTIN: Save Gas, Drive EVs, Bikes, Exercise, Walk more for Victory“ to help kick fossil addiction and accelerate shift to renewables!
~Hazel Henderson, Editor“
Your donation powers our nonprofit newsroom.
Will you support a more informed community on climate today?
“Human-induced climate change and the war on Ukraine have the same roots, fossil fuels, and our dependence on them,” a Ukrainian scientist said as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change unveiled its latest grim climate report last week. Certainly, fossil fuels are not the direct cause of a war clearly driven by the singular will of President Vladimir Putin. The world has struggled to comprehend his motives, which analysts have suggested include expansionism, grievance toward the neighboring former Soviet state and a desire to reassemble what he has described as “historical Russia.” But on a deeper level, this Ukrainian scientist is right, say those who have studied fossil fuel-dependent states and aggression: Whatever is driving Putin, his war machine is fueled by oil and gas.
Also this week, we look at carbon capture technology and the billions that the federal government is investing in technologies that remove carbon dioxide from smokestack emissions or straight from the air. Some fossil fuel giants have promoted carbon capture and storage as a tool for cutting emissions for more than a decade, with little to show for it. Still, carbon capture is gaining traction, even among some environmentalists who say that the threat of climate change is so dire that it requires every possible solution. But many progressive climate groups say oil companies are promoting the technologies as a distraction to avoid phasing out their products. At best, they argue, carbon capture and removal will play a marginal role in limiting emissions. At worst, they warn, subsidies for the technologies will prolong demand for fossil fuels, squandering money that would be better spent on replacing coal, oil and gas altogether.