The New York Times. (2022, February 2) How Spiking Energy Prices Complicate the Fight Against Global Warming. Retrieved February 2, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/02/climate/oil-gas-prices-climate-change.html

Despite the fact that world leaders are claiming to scale back their use of fossil fuels, a significant increase in the demand for crude oil, natural gas, and coal could complicate this. Oil prices have soared to the highest price in roughly seven years due to fears of Russia invading Ukraine. This issue has led experts to recognize that although businesses are beginning to invest in low carbon energy sources, there will always be a need for fossil fuels. Unless the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy is very smooth and well managed, it is likely that incentives to switch to clean energy will be diminished, which would have a significant negative impact on reversing climate change. 

I think that the geopolitical tensions between Russia and Ukraine should be a spark in the initiative to work towards net-zero emissions. The fact that this issue has driven oil prices to the highest level in nearly seven years should serve as a reminder that our reliance on fossil fuels is a serious issue, and we need to begin the transition to clean energy as soon as possible. It is important that we do not continue ignoring this issue, as the longer we wait to make the change, the more likely we are to produce irreversible levels of atmospheric carbon. 

NPR. (2022, January 28). A federal judge canceled major oil and gas leases over climate change. Retrieved February 6, 2022, from https://www.npr.org/2022/01/28/1076281662/federal-judge-canceled-gulf-oil-and-gas-leases-climate-change

After a conference in Glasgow where president Biden stated that the United States was aiming for a greener future, his administration held the largest oil and gas lease sale in U.S. history. However, a federal judge ruled that this sale was illegal, as the Biden administration had failed to consider the costs to the world’s climate. The administration allegedly utilized an analysis conducted under Trump, which was considerably flawed. This lease would have allowed oil companies to purchase 80 million acres of land (twice the size of Florida) to use for fossil fuel extraction. Fortunately, the Biden administration has promised to review the country’s oil and gas leasing program to ensure its contribution to climate change. 

I think that while it is unfortunate that our current administration was planning to allow oil companies to purchase a piece of land twice the size of Florida, it is also a major victory that this was blocked by a federal judge. This is crucial for two reasons. Firstly, it will give Biden a chance to make changes to Trump’s flawed analysis, so that a situation similar to this does not happen again. Additionally, this is an important situation because it will hopefully cause more judges to view issues like these through an environmental lens. Furthermore, this is an important story because it brings awareness to the severity of our current climate crisis. The fact that companies have the ability to purchase such large amounts of land to extract oil from is a major concern. It is crucial that instead of allowing mass crude oil extraction, we begin investing in clean energy such as nuclear power and solar. 

S&P Global. (2021, December 24) Middle East in Uphill Battle to Meet Net-Zero as Emissions Set to Rise. Retrieved February 1, 2022, from https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/122421-commodities-2022-middle-east-in-uphill-battle-to-meet-net-zero-as-emissions-set-to-rise

The Middle East is severely struggling to work towards net-zero emissions, as their economy is heavily dependent on natural gas and crude oil. Additionally, there is a big problem in the Middle East’s industrial and refining sectors, as these areas are very large, and cannot implement the usage of electricity. Saudi Arabia has pledged to reach net-zero emissions by 2060, which would be a major step in the right direction towards reversing climate change. However, the countries claims may be misleading, as they are continuing to spend billions of dollars in order to expand their crude oil production. 

While I understand that the Middle East’s economy is heavily dependent on sectors where electricity cannot be implemented, I think it is important to work harder towards net-zero emissions. With the OPEC kingpin Saudi Arabia claiming to reach net-zero by the year 2060, while continuing to upscale their crude oil output, it is clear that we are not taking this matter seriously enough. Countries need to be more focused on investing their money towards nuclear power and other sources of electricity, as opposed to expanding their crude output capacity. If we do not begin this process now, carbon emissions are going to continue to rise, and it will become increasingly difficult to remove carbon from the atmosphere, let alone reduce our output.

Alejandra, Borunda. (October 4th, 2021) Why is California still drilling for oil despite its ambitious climate goals? Retrieved February 4th, 2022, from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/why-is-california-still-drilling-for-oil-despite-its-ambitious-climate-goals

After the Huntington Beach oil spill, a lot of research has been put into the possible effects and immediate effects that have already occurred. After about 126,000 gallons of oil spread out across 13 square miles, this spill has already created a change in migration patterns for essential birds to the wetlands. The spill is expected to have worse effects than the 2015 Santa Barbara oil spill which had destroyed the surrounding areas for up to 2 years and stunning growth and still is stunning growth now. After being reviewed by Stanford, Californias oil has been determined the most expensive in ecosystem effects and just overall cost. The oil spill has brought up the question of why is California still drilling and the answer was that oil makes up about 1% of the state’s GDP which is a very large number. As Californians we can see the problem yet we are not seemingly assessing the root of the problem.

The first thing I found to be very crazy about this article is the facts and info it has brought in to show the amount of damage these spills cause and also this one. The fact that a previous spill has had such lasting effects and that this is an even larger spill concerns me. How long will these effects last for this time? Did we catch the spill in time? But I think these aren’t even the right questions, I think that we need to ask questions about how we are sourcing our oil and if it is worth it. The article even said that all of the oil that we produce ourselves is some of the most costly oil to extract and is that worth it. We could save the environmental damage and just ship it in, yes this means we still use oil but it means we don’t have to deal with spills. And with the shipping in of oil, it means it is more costly creating a want for change within energy sources. Here in California we aren’t known for our spills yet we get them very often still and they are very detrimental. I think the facts provided about the damage show we need to change and think of how to change fast. 

Talia, Kaplan. (February 1, 2022) Gas prices in California will soar following the LA ban on new oil and gas wells, industry rep warns. Retrieved from February 4th, 2022, from

https://www.foxbusiness.com/energy/how-will-los-angeles-ban-on-new-oil-and-gas-wells-impact-drivers-wallets

In Los Angeles California, gas prices could be on an even more extreme rise as oil production is even more limited. Los Angeles City Council voted to ban new oil wells along with phasing out preexisting wells. Arguments against the movement, state that this will create a loss of jobs and raise the price of gas. If more gas production is phased out in California more will be imported raising the prices even more. In response job programs have been created by the council for the workers. 

I think that this is a great decision by the city as they are working to phase outgas. Along with this, even the downsides are somewhat beneficial, as gas prices rise people will want to use less of it, therefore, creating a push for alternatives and a move to alternatives. I think that this is all great news for our future world as although yes we will still be importing oils and gasses it will be much more expensive and incentivize more change. Also, we will not be taxing our land by drilling or extracting oils which yes we will still be polluting the land but we won’t be disrupting the integrity of it as much. This move is a great step in the long push to minimize oil and gas usage from our world. 

LA, Times. (2021, December 17). Did California Issue Its Last Fracking Permit? Retrieved January 27, 2022, from https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-12-17/fracking-permits

I couldn’t access the site again without subscribing so I do not know the author^

State oil and gas regulators have been denying hydraulic fracturing(Fracking) permits in California. No new permits have been issued since February of 2021, although there have been over 100 requests. And is the start of a new age may be as this is the first year California has denied a permit, this news could mean an end to fracking within California. The goal of the state and oil regulators is to limit the effects of oil extraction and therefore, hopefully, production in California as they have related to the heatwaves, wildfires, and droughts. Along with the impact that hydraulic fracking has on the communities nearby and the people within them. Although over 500 new permits have been granted for oil and gas drilling, the government plans to decrease the number gradually to not fully shock the economy. 

I think that this is great news within California, although fracking makes up only about 2% of all oil production within California it shows the government is starting to phase out oil production. Fracking as an industry was harmful and not needed as it only was so limited so to see that the Government realized that and made it a priority to remove it means something. I do agree with the plans which are to slowly phase out the oil drilling within California gradually too and not all at once, because if we were to phase it out immediately not only would economic problems occur but our society would not be adapted or ready enough to embrace the full change too. 

Emma, Newburger (2021 October, 21). California moves to ban oil wells within 3,200 feet of homes and schools. Retrieved January 27, 2022, from https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/21/california-moves-to-ban-oil-wells-within-3200-feet-of-homes-schools.html

Governor Gavin Newsom proposed to have a 3,200-foot buffer zone, separating schools, homes, and hospitals from oil and gas wells. Any wells within the zones would be required to implement new pollution controls. California has no pre-existing buffer zone which causes the 7th highest oil-producing states, residents, many health problems. Including asthma and other birth defects. This oil buffer zone is not something new as other states have already implemented similar regulations but California would be the largest in the country. The overall downside of this would be the impact on the oil industry and its workers.

I think this is a great thing, it is a small step towards moving away from fossil fuels and is helping communities and their health. The new regulations would also help the environment around the wells which would be amazing. And although fracking wasn’t able to be banned this as I said would be a small but crucial step towards moving California a major fossil fuel producer and consumer away from it all. Yes, this would affect the price of fossil fuels but that as well helps motivate people to move away from them and to new renewable sources. 

Matt, Vasilogambros. (2021, December 20). California Oil Spill Prompts New Push to Ban Offshore Drilling. Retrieved January 28, 2022, from https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2021/12/20/california-oil-spill-prompts-new-push-to-ban-offshore-drilling

After a 25,000-gallon oil spill off the shore of Huntington beach. Many propose, to ban offshore drilling in California; requiring going through federal and state jurisdictions, along with voiding contracts. Newsom already called to end all oil extraction by 2045, but the majority of California’s workforce is within the oil and creates strong opposition. Opposition proposes to create an oil tax, therefore, using oil tax money to support conservation efforts and coastal restoration efforts. Many other states have already put bans in place on offshore drilling showing it is possible for California. California already banned any new leases to offshore drilling after 1994 but drilling operations before the ban are still allowed. Many of these rigs are outdated and have lived past their expected lifespans yet continue to operate and help California to be the 7th largest producer of oil within the country. Many think that all the rigs should be shut down as each passing year exponentially increases the odds of a spill due to the rig’s age. These dismantling projects as a whole would take billions and many years. 

I think this is striking seeing how detrimental the spill was and seeing that although people are calling for action, none has been taken or seemingly won’t for a while. Many of the rigs should simply not be in service due to their age and wear yet they still operate and further risk the oceans and ecosystems around the coast of California. The opposition to the dismantled plans does bring up good alternatives such as an oil tax which would be very beneficial. But change should happen and so many people are valuing their economic wealth over environmental health and I think that this is crazy. The projects would cost both sides extreme amounts of money but wouldn’t that save the money that is required to clean the oceans and restore the damage? We are starting to see the signs of deteriorating offshore oil rigs and it is just the start, only more problems are going to occur and more spills will happen. Yes, it would drive down the oil production of the 7th highest producing state in the nation, and would overall drive down the amount of oil within the US and require more imported oil. But this would force innovation and the move to renewable energy.

Maersk, the largest shipping line company in the world, based in Denmark, consumes 12 million tons of marine oil each year. However they have a plan to curb this consumption in order  to be carbon neutral by 2050. One step towards that is investing in the Silicon Valley startup Prometheus Fuels. Prometheus Fuels produces fuel by turning direct air capture CO2 into fuel. By investing a minority stake in the company, they earn a spot at the company’s board of directors. The purchase was of an undisclosed amount, but the investment will help develop Prometheus Fuels directive of helping big, oil-using companies, to ditch oil.

I find it so exciting to live in an area so booming with innovation for the future. It really gives me hope. I know this article is on the line between being a world topic, and a biofuel topic, and a California topic but it was too cool for me not to write about. We live in Silicon Valley, and the biggest shipping company in the world is trying to curb its fossil fuels by investing in a California, Silicon Valley start-up. Like UC Steve said it is going to be about mitigation and adaptation. We can’t stop using oil so we must find new solutions by creating new fuel. Hopefully more oil consuming companies will follow Maersk and begin looking for new ways to power their business. Especially here in our backyard. 

This article discusses the Center for Biological Diversity’s lawsuit against the government over lack of protection for whales, turtles, and abalone. They are arguing that due to the oil spill in Huntington Beach that the Trump administration’s analysis that “oil spill was unlikely and would be limited to 8,400 gallons if one occurred” is wrong and therefore new drilling permits should be suspended until the risk is adequately analyzed. The CBD also believes that a scientific analysis of the situation would show that drilling off the coast of California is too destructive and dangerous, and should be phased out soon.

The Huntington Beach oil spill is a wake-up call to the government on what to do about oil. This ongoing lawsuit is one of many as a result of the oil spill in late 2021 and shows how dangerous offshore oil poses to endangered wildlife. I personally would love to see initiative from the government to beinn repairs and maintenance on these underwater oil pipes. Secondly, it is important for a scientific analysis of the area so we can best plan and prepare for future oil spills, and help prevent wildlife damage. An analysis like this, as stated above, also has the potential to be a catalyst to begin ridding the coast of oil rigs and drills.