Fossil Fuel Companies Roll Out A New Era Of Spin | Talking Points Memo

TPM Article Topics
1

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1248964
1 Like
2

We’re not going to make it.

Revised models are showing the warming to be happening faster than expected. And Republicans still don’t care.

Yeah, yeah, the elite will have their billions in oil profits safely tucked away. Good luck eating it, you fools.

3

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-09/gas-plants-will-get-crushed-by-wind-solar-by-2035-study-says

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-can-renewable-energy-power-the-world/

They can try but facts are overtaking their lies. These links are just a couple of the more recent ones I have read.

1 Like
4

Republicans and the fossil fuel industry will fight tooth and nail against any possible advance in energy production or usage that doesn’t make them money and keep them in power. When it becomes impossible to stand against the changing world anymore, they will flip around and try to use propaganda to make it seem like they were working towards getting rid of fossil fuels all along. We can’t let them succeed when they try to change the narrative, they have to be held accountable for the damage they have done by blocking moves to a carbon-neutral world.

1 Like
5

I believe the term you’re looking for is “petronormative.”

6

I posted this in the “Newsworthy Topics” earlier today, and am double-posting it here (where it seems relevant):
New Yorker: Money Is the Oxygen on Which the Fire of Global Warming Burns

What if the banking, asset-management, and insurance industries moved away from fossil fuels?

[Bill McKibben, a former New Yorker staff writer, is a founder of the grassroots climate campaign 350.org and the Schumann Distinguished Scholar in environmental studies at Middlebury College.]

7

Over the years, fossil fuel companies have poured millions into sowing doubt about climate science and burnishing their public image. Now, fossil fuel companies are reckoning with a different communications challenge: convincing their investors that the future of oil and gas companies is bright … or at least bright enough.

I have read that within 15 years 90% of all fossil fuel plants and usage will not be able to pay for themselves. That means, for example, the NG pipeline National Grid wants to build from NJ into NYC has less than 10 years after built to earn back the $1B needed to build. That ain’t gonna happen no matter what price they charge. Investors should be taking things like this in mind when they decide if a project is worth the investment.

Fossil companies can spout nonsense all they want but the reality is fast approaching.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-09/gas-plants-will-get-crushed-by-wind-solar-by-2035-study-says

8

I have read recently that that is exactly what the power utilities in AZ are trying. Instead of working with solar and its advantages/disadvantages they are trying to stifle. So they want the AZ Leg to allow them to charge $75 per month for solar customers instead of the usual min charge of $25. They claim they need that $50 increase because the solar customer is not paying their share. That charge would also be in effect for solar users that are 100% off the grid, if I am reading correctly.

HI on the other hand is working with their solar customers to provide backup batteries at discount prices if they can tap those batteries when the extra demand is required. Using home solar battery backup, if I understand correctly, means the utility need not build at least 2 new plants. That is smart management.