scholarly journals If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it: how the public’s economic confidence in the fossil fuel industry reduces support for a clean energy transition

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Christian Schimpf ◽  
Brooks DeCillia ◽  
Nikita Sleptcov ◽  
Melanee Thomas ◽  
Lori Thorlakson
2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony E. Ladd

Since the oil embargos of the 1970s, the fossil fuel industry and allied energy interests have helped manufacture a variety of discursive narratives that an alternative energy revolution is on the horizon which will someday replace conventional fuels with clean, renewable, noncarbonized sources of energy. A closer inspection of the industry’s investments and rhetoric, however, suggests that they are currently investing most of their historic profits in creating a future largely driven by unconventional fossil fuel dependence, intensive hydraulic fracking, and the continued control of the energy sector by essentially the same transnational corporations that control the market today. This article offers a critical analysis of the historical roots of our fossil fuel dependency, some of the key socioenvironmental threats associated with the emerging Third Carbon Era, and the myriad dangers associated with a future based on unconventional energy development, hydraulic fracking, and other “extreme energy” technologies. Focusing on the growing social and ecological impacts of natural gas fracking as a case in point, particularly its myth as a “bridge fuel” to a clean energy future, it is argued that these energy trends represent yet another “New Species of Trouble” in the Risk Society of late modernity.


Polar Record ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohvi Kangasluoma

Abstract Despite the global alarm caused by accelerating climate change, hydrocarbon companies are exploring and opening up new oil and gas fields all over the world, including the Arctic. With increasing attention on the Arctic, companies address the growing global environmental pressure in their public marketing in various ways. This article examines the webpages of Norwegian Equinor and Russian Gazprom & Gazprom Neft. Building on feminist discussions, I analyse the different justification strategies these fossil fuel companies working in the Arctic utilise in order to support their ongoing operations. This article concludes that in order to justify their operations in the Arctic, the Norwegian and Russian companies emphasise values based on discourses that have historically and culturally been associated with masculine practices, such as the control of nature enabled by technology. These justifications are thus reinforcing the narrative of the Arctic as a territory to be conquered and mastered. Even though the companies operate in different sociopolitical contexts, the grounds of justification are rather similar. Their biggest differences occur in their visual presentations of gender, which I argue is part of the justification. Approaching the fossil fuel industry from a feminist perspective allows questioning the dominant conceptualisations, which the justifications of Arctic hydrocarbon companies are based on.


2021 ◽  
pp. 24-54
Author(s):  
Peter Drahos

China is an implausible leader for the globalization of a bio-digital energy paradigm, but the United States and European Union are even less plausible candidates. The chapter shows how the fracking revolution has turned the United States into an energy-secure fossil fuel superpower. No US president can close down the fossil fuel industry. The New Green Deal is unlikely to have much impact on US politics and is only of modest interest to Wall Street. The European Union’s Energy Union initiative is important. But the European Union’s leadership of the bio-digital energy paradigm is hampered by the different energy and industrial interests of its members. Despite China’s corruption problems, it is the least implausible leader of an energy revolution. China’s improved standard-setting capacities are outlined. The chapter concludes by discussing China’s pressure-driving mechanism, a distinctive tool of governance that allows China to overcome problems of fragmentation in its system.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Downie

AbstractIn the field of business and politics, research on the role of business actors in individual fossil fuel industries that contribute to climate change has been sparse. At the same time theorising the role of ad hoc coalitions has been limited even though they appear to be an important vehicle for business actors seeking to shape contemporary policy contests. This paper attempts to address these understudied areas by drawing on a rich empirical dataset to examine the role of three ad hoc coalitions in the U.S. energy sector. In doing so, it builds on the existing literature to establish a theoretical basis for identifying the defining elements of ad hoc coalitions and the conditions under which business actors decide to establish them. Further, it sheds light on how business actors use ad hoc coalitions in three key fossil fuel industries—gas, oil, and coal—to shape policy outcomes, and in turn shape the path to a clean energy transition.


2019 ◽  
Vol 158 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 301-307
Author(s):  
Steven M. Karceski ◽  
Nives Dolšak ◽  
Aseem Prakash ◽  
Travis N. Ridout

Elem Sci Anth ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupinder Mangat ◽  
Simon Dalby

Fossil fuel divestment activists re-imagine how the war metaphor can be used in climate change action to transform thinking around what will lead to a sustainable society. Through the naming of a clear enemy and an end goal, the overused war metaphor is renewed. By casting the fossil fuel industry in the role of enemy, fossil fuel divestment activists move to a re-imagining of the climate change problem as one that is located in the here and now with known villains who must be challenged and defeated. In this scenario, climate activists move away from the climate and national security framing to a climate and human security way of thinking.


Author(s):  
Andrew Cheon ◽  
Johannes Urpelainen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document