In Louisiana, natural gas—a planet-heating fossil fuel—is now, by law, considered “green energy” that can compete with solar and wind projects for clean energy funding. The law, signed by Republican Governor Jeff Landry last month, comes on the heels of similar bills passed in Ohio, Tennessee, and Indiana. What the bills have in common—besides an “updated definition” of a fossil fuel as a clean energy source—is language seemingly plucked straight from a right-wing think tank backed by oil and gas billionaire and activist Charles Koch.
Louisiana’s law was based on a template created by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a conservative organization that brings legislators and corporate lobbyists together to draft bills “dedicated to the principles of limited government, free markets and federalism.” The law maintains that Louisiana, in order to minimize its reliance on “foreign adversary nations” for energy, must ensure that natural gas and nuclear power are eligible for “all state programs that fund ‘green energy’ or ‘clean energy’ initiatives.”
Fossil fuels are green fuels, war is peace…
Freedom is Slavery…
I said this in another thread as well, but it bears repeating that Natural Gas can be greener than other fossil fuels like coal or oil. As a step in the process, it’s moving the ball in the right direction and most of the gas is mined locally, which means fewer international political complications. It is worth investing in natural gas as a part of a green energy future.
HOWEVER, far too many people make far too much money mining for and selling natural gas for it to be just part of the process. Corners are cut, toxic solvents go into the ground, people die of cancer, and we’re still burning fossil fuels and releasing carbon into the air. It’s better than strip mining for coal, and it’s better than dealing with despots for oil, but if the human race expects to continue to thrive, it’s not a solution.
So I’m torn on this. I want government investments in NG infrastructure, but I want it to come with thick, multistranded cable-like strings attached. I want environmental regulations, and labor regulations. I want price controls and tax revenue. And I want it to include a transition plan away from NG eventually as greener options become more viable.
And I’m fully aware none of that is possible with the current political landscape.
I feel like your “can be” should be more highlighted, because it definitely isn’t in these cases.
Good point, it’s not necessarily better. It can be much worse for the environment, especially when wells aren’t properly drilled and capped, waste fluids aren’t properly treated and disposed of, transportation pipes leak, or power plants burn inefficiently. All of those things cost money, which means less profit, which means nobody will do it voluntarily.
