Just Stop Oil, a UK-based campaign group, has recently caught the attention of the media and the public by disrupting public transport and high-profile sporting events. As the name implies, they wish to abruptly halt oil production. The group’s inflammatory manifesto insists that if our reliance on fossil fuels doesn’t end within eight years, we will witness the “starvation and slaughter of billions of the poor – and the utter betrayal of our children and their future.”
In his article titled “What if We Just Stop Oil?” Pielke Jr. suggests that this campaign is not just misguided but potentially catastrophic. He asserts,
“Advocating for the impossible is a good way to get nothing done.”
Moreover, he points out that no scientific literature suggests it’s even remotely possible to eliminate fossil fuel use in the next eight years.
Pielke criticizes the campaign’s ill-informed call to just stop oil, noting that such a sudden halt would result in a severe global energy crisis. As evidence, he points to the 1973 oil crisis, when an abrupt change in oil supply led to prices spiking by 400%. A similar situation today would result in oil prices reaching $300 per barrel, leading to inflation, depressed economic growth, and a significant increase in global hunger and malnutrition.
Just Stop Oil’s rhetoric can be traced back to what Richard Hofstadter’s famous 1964 essay termed the “paranoid style” of politics. Hofstadter describes this approach as having an “anxiety of those who are living through the last days” and setting a date for the apocalypse.
The article suggests that the paranoid approach feeds on demands for impossible goals, leading to inevitable failure, which further fuels the sense of powerlessness among the movement’s followers. This concept is encapsulated in Hofstadter’s words:
“This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration.”
The fact that Just Stop Oil and their fellow travelers believe that we face a looming apocalypse is not simply the result of some millenarian cult leader — it is in part the result of being egged on by scientists and political leaders. Below is the header found on the homepage of Just Stop Oil.
Probably the most scathing part of Pielke’s essay is this:
Here are some other quotes that Just Stop Oilcites in support of its impossible demands, based on a belief that “Further expansion of oil and gas production globally is putting us on course for human extinction”:
“If governments are serious about the climate crisis, there can be no new investments in oil, gas and coal, from now – from this year.” Fatih Birol, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, 2021
“If damaging tipping cascades can occur and a global tipping point cannot be ruled out, then this is an existential threat to civilization. No amount of economic cost–benefit analysis is going to help us. We need to change our approach to the climate problem.” Lenton et al, 2020
‘If we go into a runaway climate effect, the damage may be between €100 trillion and the loss of civilisation” Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
“The scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and the health of the planet. Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a liveable future” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group II Co-Chair Hans-Otto Pörtner, 28th February 2021
I am aware of no scientist — including those cited above and those leading the IPCC — who has offered any sort of corrective to the scientific misunderstandings advanced by Just Stop Oil. If I’ve missed such correctives, please let me know.
What makes this situation even more problematic is the fact that Just Stop Oil, despite its misguided stance, is backed by wealthy Americans whose fortunes came from the very fossil fuels they’re now opposing. This situation creates an ironic and potentially harmful dynamic in which wealth and influence stoke the fires of anxiety and fear among regular people, many of whom are young activists.
Pielke’s views would not generally be considered those of a climate skeptic:
Let me remind readers here that I am fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy, a topic I wrote a PhD dissertation on almost 30 years ago and my book The Climate Fix much more recently.
In conclusion, Pielke asserts that “we need to do better by these activists.” He implores us to move away from apocalyptic rhetoric and instead engage these young people with realistic and effective policies that can make a tangible difference. As he rightly puts it,
No one is stopping these people from not using oil. I’m pretty sure that if they tried it, they would be demanding more oil after a single day without it. Be careful what you wish for, these people look like the last group that could survive in a world with no oil.
spren
July 13, 2023 5:54 pm
No Pielke, we don’t owe these idiots anything. And we don’t need to de-carbonize our economy either. I used to think Pielke Jr. was on the ball, but apparently Pielke Sr. didn’t pass the intelligence on to his son.
There may be reasons to lessen CO2 emissions that have nothing to do with climate.
Example: removing heavy metals, sulfur & particulates from the burning of coal is costly and yet incomplete. Switching to natural gas might be worthwhile.
Pielke is articulate, smart and occasionally witty. You may not agree with everything he says,
[I don’t] but don’t denigrate him personally. We [skeptics] need more people like him.
As the adage goes: “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”.
The main drive behind all this activism, are the vast amounts of money that these organizations are receiving. It’s clear, that as long as their funding goes on, the worse it’s going to get, with ever increasing extreme positions, in order to generate media attention.
Sometimes, there’s not even any serious ecological rationale remaining.
Somebody ought to put their funders in jail, for the lawbreaking that has occurred, or at least under investigation. Who are these puppet masters? Do they have the best interests of the public in their minds?
I don’t see politicians or news organizations asking these questions. Perhaps because they are all funded by the same puppet masters.
Dave Fair
July 13, 2023 11:23 pm
“Pielke asserts that “we need to do better by these activists.” He implores us to move away from apocalyptic rhetoric and instead engage these young people with realistic and effective policies that can make a tangible difference.”
No. The people using such apocalyptic rhetoric are aware of their falsehoods but base their careers and livelihoods on such exaggeration; they are not going to change because of someone’s request. They must be run out of the public square by revealing their lies to the general public.
Additionally, there are no “realistic and effective policies that can make a tangible difference.” By tangible difference he means significant near to medium term (out to 2050+) reductions in Man’s CO2 emissions. There are numerous credible studies of the technical and economic impossibilities of Western countries reaching Net Zero by 2050. There is also no indications that the developing countries led by China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Russia have any desire, much less plans to reach Net Zero at any time in the future.
I respect Dr. Pielke, Jr. greatly. But we are not served well by his continued attempts to stay in the middle of the climate crisis divide. These young people don’t want the Man soothing them with his notions of “realistic and effective policies.” With no “climate” damages accruing over the next decade or so and the ongoing economic damage of climate policies becoming manifest the various movements will die out.
An organisation that trumpets a quote from Sir(?!) D.King, for whom the most relevant word within the speech marks above is “former”, is really struggling if they consider this individual has a shred of credibility left. As the mouthpiece for soi disant (and I use that phrase very deliberately) “Independent SAGE”, the group of self appointed, delusional, arrogant totalitarians, he destroyed what was left of his professional credentials consistently between 2020 and 2022 by advocating far more draconian lockdown measures – amongst others. He was regularly trotted out on the …BBC which tells you everything. He is a fully paid up member of Science 101.
From the article: “The scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and the health of the planet. Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a liveable future” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group II Co-Chair Hans-Otto Pörtner, 28th February 2021″
Absolutely False!
There is no unequivocal evidence, or any evidence, that CO2 is doing anything these climate alarmists claim it is doing to the atmosphere. None, whatsoever. So this clown, Hans-Otto Pörtner, is lying to the whole world. He couldn’t prove what he is saying if his life depended on it.
From the article: “Let me remind readers here that I am fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy, a topic I wrote a PhD dissertation on almost 30 years ago and my book The Climate Fix much more recently.”
Ridiculous!
Even a smart guy like Mr. Pielke can be wrong. Mr. Pielke doesn’t have any more evidence for what he says about CO2 and the Earth’s atmosphere than does Hans-Otto Pörtner. Both of them think CO2 needs regulation, but there is NO evidence this is the case. Both people are indulging in pure speculation.
“Let me remind readers here that I am fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy…”
????
Sapper2
July 14, 2023 5:06 am
The Government has much to answer for in not rebutting those extreme and ridiculous claims by JSO. Public information is part of its remit. For failing the majority the parliamentarians deserve to be ousted eat the next GE. Whether decent, intelligent, and having scientific or technical understanding under their belt candidates are elected is another matter.
“The Government has much to answer for in not rebutting . . .”
Actually, no. Follow the money (and the power).
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
— H.L. Mencken
Let me remind Roger Piekle jr. that being fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy makes him as much a part of the problem as Just Stop Oil.
As Roger jr. agrees with the premise, he creates the circumstances and supports the logic that produces extremist partisans. Like the liberal who wrings his hands over Antifa burning a city, all the while supporting the politics and declaiming their sincerity.
Roger jr. creates the context and provides the social matrix of agreement — the soil — from which the crazies emerge.
I let Roger jr. know about Propagation years ago. He is no more willing to change his stance on CO₂ than the most ardent just stop oil nutcase.
You’re part of the problem, Roger, jr. And no part of the solution.
Just Stop Oil seems unaware that, in addition to fuel, some 6000 by-products are made from oil and gas compounds. If Just Stop Oil succeeds, we will have to do without these products, and that would bring modern life to a screeching halt. Asphalt for roads, synthetic rubber for tires, plastic for computer cases, cell phone cases, credit cards, blood bags, trash bags, rain coats, running shoes, insulation on electrical wires, food packaging… none of these conveniences are made from unavailium, unobtainium or pixies’ nose boogers. All of them are born in oil and gas wells. The Just Stop Oil ignoramuses need to be bodily removed from any policy-making venues and deposited in the nearest frog pond.
willhaas
July 16, 2023 4:51 pm
They themselves should lead the way by stop making use of all goods and services that make use of fossil fuels. That would include products such as wearing apparel, and food that has been moved by truck. That would include entering buildings or walking on surfaces made from materials moved by truck, plane, train, or ship that makes use of fossil fuels Apparently they have not done that.
An unrealistic demand rooted in HYPOCRISY! JSO people use FF every day and they think that should not matter to others. CRAZY!
I don’t owe a bunch of narcissistic, leftarded morons who want to wipe out the human race by destroying humanity’s energy production a damned thing.
No one is stopping these people from not using oil. I’m pretty sure that if they tried it, they would be demanding more oil after a single day without it. Be careful what you wish for, these people look like the last group that could survive in a world with no oil.
No Pielke, we don’t owe these idiots anything. And we don’t need to de-carbonize our economy either. I used to think Pielke Jr. was on the ball, but apparently Pielke Sr. didn’t pass the intelligence on to his son.
spren:
See my post to Larry K above.
There may be reasons to lessen CO2 emissions that have nothing to do with climate.
Example: removing heavy metals, sulfur & particulates from the burning of coal is costly and yet incomplete. Switching to natural gas might be worthwhile.
Pielke is articulate, smart and occasionally witty. You may not agree with everything he says,
[I don’t] but don’t denigrate him personally. We [skeptics] need more people like him.
As the adage goes: “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”.
Make them stop first.
A poignant pic of the Socialist Stew of Screechy Shrews emoting.
The main drive behind all this activism, are the vast amounts of money that these organizations are receiving. It’s clear, that as long as their funding goes on, the worse it’s going to get, with ever increasing extreme positions, in order to generate media attention.
Sometimes, there’s not even any serious ecological rationale remaining.
Somebody ought to put their funders in jail, for the lawbreaking that has occurred, or at least under investigation. Who are these puppet masters? Do they have the best interests of the public in their minds?
I don’t see politicians or news organizations asking these questions. Perhaps because they are all funded by the same puppet masters.
“Pielke asserts that “we need to do better by these activists.” He implores us to move away from apocalyptic rhetoric and instead engage these young people with realistic and effective policies that can make a tangible difference.”
No. The people using such apocalyptic rhetoric are aware of their falsehoods but base their careers and livelihoods on such exaggeration; they are not going to change because of someone’s request. They must be run out of the public square by revealing their lies to the general public.
Additionally, there are no “realistic and effective policies that can make a tangible difference.” By tangible difference he means significant near to medium term (out to 2050+) reductions in Man’s CO2 emissions. There are numerous credible studies of the technical and economic impossibilities of Western countries reaching Net Zero by 2050. There is also no indications that the developing countries led by China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Russia have any desire, much less plans to reach Net Zero at any time in the future.
I respect Dr. Pielke, Jr. greatly. But we are not served well by his continued attempts to stay in the middle of the climate crisis divide. These young people don’t want the Man soothing them with his notions of “realistic and effective policies.” With no “climate” damages accruing over the next decade or so and the ongoing economic damage of climate policies becoming manifest the various movements will die out.
No armpit hair? They don’t make environmental activists like they once did.
ROFL
Very non-PC. I love it!
An organisation that trumpets a quote from Sir(?!) D.King, for whom the most relevant word within the speech marks above is “former”, is really struggling if they consider this individual has a shred of credibility left. As the mouthpiece for soi disant (and I use that phrase very deliberately) “Independent SAGE”, the group of self appointed, delusional, arrogant totalitarians, he destroyed what was left of his professional credentials consistently between 2020 and 2022 by advocating far more draconian lockdown measures – amongst others. He was regularly trotted out on the …BBC which tells you everything. He is a fully paid up member of Science 101.
From the article: “The scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and the health of the planet. Any further delay in concerted global action will miss a brief and rapidly closing window to secure a liveable future” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Sixth Assessment Report, Working Group II Co-Chair Hans-Otto Pörtner, 28th February 2021″
Absolutely False!
There is no unequivocal evidence, or any evidence, that CO2 is doing anything these climate alarmists claim it is doing to the atmosphere. None, whatsoever. So this clown, Hans-Otto Pörtner, is lying to the whole world. He couldn’t prove what he is saying if his life depended on it.
From the article: “Let me remind readers here that I am fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy, a topic I wrote a PhD dissertation on almost 30 years ago and my book The Climate Fix much more recently.”
Ridiculous!
Even a smart guy like Mr. Pielke can be wrong. Mr. Pielke doesn’t have any more evidence for what he says about CO2 and the Earth’s atmosphere than does Hans-Otto Pörtner. Both of them think CO2 needs regulation, but there is NO evidence this is the case. Both people are indulging in pure speculation.
How disappointing.
“Let me remind readers here that I am fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy…”
????
The Government has much to answer for in not rebutting those extreme and ridiculous claims by JSO. Public information is part of its remit. For failing the majority the parliamentarians deserve to be ousted eat the next GE. Whether decent, intelligent, and having scientific or technical understanding under their belt candidates are elected is another matter.
Actually, no. Follow the money (and the power).
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
— H.L. Mencken
Let me remind Roger Piekle jr. that being fully on board with the importance of decarbonizing the global economy makes him as much a part of the problem as Just Stop Oil.
As Roger jr. agrees with the premise, he creates the circumstances and supports the logic that produces extremist partisans. Like the liberal who wrings his hands over Antifa burning a city, all the while supporting the politics and declaiming their sincerity.
Roger jr. creates the context and provides the social matrix of agreement — the soil — from which the crazies emerge.
I let Roger jr. know about Propagation years ago. He is no more willing to change his stance on CO₂ than the most ardent just stop oil nutcase.
You’re part of the problem, Roger, jr. And no part of the solution.
“You’re part of the problem, Roger, jr. And no part of the solution.”
I agree.
What is a realistic and effective policy for a non-existent problem? Group therapy, perhaps?
That picture.
Looks like AOC forgot her glasses.
Just Stop Oil seems unaware that, in addition to fuel, some 6000 by-products are made from oil and gas compounds. If Just Stop Oil succeeds, we will have to do without these products, and that would bring modern life to a screeching halt. Asphalt for roads, synthetic rubber for tires, plastic for computer cases, cell phone cases, credit cards, blood bags, trash bags, rain coats, running shoes, insulation on electrical wires, food packaging… none of these conveniences are made from unavailium, unobtainium or pixies’ nose boogers. All of them are born in oil and gas wells. The Just Stop Oil ignoramuses need to be bodily removed from any policy-making venues and deposited in the nearest frog pond.
They themselves should lead the way by stop making use of all goods and services that make use of fossil fuels. That would include products such as wearing apparel, and food that has been moved by truck. That would include entering buildings or walking on surfaces made from materials moved by truck, plane, train, or ship that makes use of fossil fuels Apparently they have not done that.