Getting rid of life-saving fossil fuel products is a fantasy

This op-ed is part of a series published by The Dallas Morning News Opinion section to explore ideas and policies for strengthening electric reliability. Find the full series here: Keeping the Lights On.

Climate activists and environmental groups from across the country descended on Washington, D.C., in October for a weeklong People vs. Fossil Fuels Mobilization event to demand that the Biden administration and Congress act on the environment.

Protesters demonstrated outside the White House and the Capitol and even forced their way into the U.S. Department of Interior offices, injuring security personnel and sending at least one law enforcement officer to the hospital. Their laundry list of demands is extensive: end fracking, ban fossil fuel exports, stop approvals of fossil fuel infrastructure projects, declare a climate emergency, and support a phaseout of fossil fuels. In short, go cold turkey.

The activists, however, have a myopic view of a world without oil and natural gas that neglects to factor in just how critical these resources are to a functioning society.

The United States would have been unable to advance and develop without fossil fuels driving the Industrial Revolution. World War I, World War II and other global wars would have ended differently without fossil fuels powering our airplanes and ships. Oil and natural gas are woven into Americans’ everyday lives, and not just at the fuel pump — roughly 31% of petroleum is used for nontransportation purposes, according to calculations by the Illinois Petroleum Resources Board.

More than 6,000 products we use daily are either refined, manufactured or both with oil and natural gas liquids, including electronics, cosmetics, paint and even medicine. As we continue to battle the COVID-19 pandemic, it is worth noting that the emergency room treating those patients, and others, contains an estimated 90 products derived from fossil fuels. It becomes much more difficult, if not impossible, to provide lifesaving care without IV tubes, monitors, ventilators and basic supplies like face mask, gloves and soap.

The need for these products won’t go away, nor will global energy demand, which is expected to increase by 5% this year and 4% next year, according to the International Energy Agency. Although IEA anticipates renewables will have strong growth over the next two years, the group concluded that renewable energy “will only be able to meet around half the projected increase in global electricity demand” over the same time frame. That leaves fossil fuel-based electricity generation to pick up the slack.

Even the Biden administration acknowledges this reality to some extent. As the protesters were outside the White House, inside, spokesperson Jen Psaki was telling reporters that a natural gas supply shortage due to the pandemic has resulted in a “need for the United States to continue to export natural gas.”

The administration is even reaching out to the oil and gas sector for assistance as it tries to curb rising prices at the pump. And after seeing the extensive impact of Winter Storm Uri earlier this year, in which at least 4.5 million electricity customers in Texas lost power and estimated dozens of people died, it is clear we need all available energy resources to avoid widespread blackouts and brownouts, especially during peak demand and extreme weather events.

An energy policy recalibration that includes supporting pipeline infrastructure projects would be a great place to begin, as pipelines are critical components of any successful effort to meet both energy demand and combat high costs. Climate activists, however, remain fixated on their goal of a fossil fuel-free world and that means no pipelines.

They are pressuring the Biden administration to ax the Dakota Access Pipeline, which has been operational for more than four years and tangled up in the legal system for even longer. During the summer, a federal judge finally dismissed the case brought by several Native American tribes to shut down the pipeline; yet the legal and bureaucratic entanglements continue with the Dakota Access pipeline, subjected to an additional environmental impact statement. Now the tribes involved in that review have accused the firm hired to conduct the impact statement of bias and want the process to start anew.

Pipelines like Dakota Access are crucial to maintaining the nation’s energy independence and are the safest, most efficient and environmentally friendly method of delivering the energy resources that are not only the basis of essential — and lifesaving — products, but also enable Americans to heat their homes, cook dinner and drive to work. Americans on the East Coast got a taste of life without pipelines when the Colonial cyberattack occurred earlier this year, and it wasn’t pretty. Now imagine the impact on the entire nation if there were no pipelines at all.

A cleaner environment is a goal we all share, and one that can be attained through productive discussions and thoughtful and far-sighted energy policies. Society has reaped tremendous benefits from fossil fuels, and the notion that we can abandon them without repercussions is pure fantasy.

Bill Godsey is owner and president of Geo Logic Environmental Services and a former geologist for the Texas Railroad Commission. He wrote this column for The Dallas Morning News.

Find the full opinion section here. Got an opinion about this issue? Send a letter to the editor and you just might get published.