It's unfortunate that climate change has become a divisive, partisan issue in our country, but it's understandable why some view it as such. Communities and local economies have been built on fossil fuel extraction and refinement, and accepting the science that climate change is real and predominantly human induced means confronting the difficult realities laid out in Bill McKibben's writings on the math of climate change: if we're serious about avoiding the worst consequences of climate change, we can burn only a small fraction of known fossil-fuel reserves. Since fossil fuels currently provide for the majority of humanity’s energy needs, we’re going to need to find alternative energy sources.
Transitioning to a carbon-neutral society necessarily means the fossil-fuel industry needs to shrink and eventually die, and this means the end of many people’s current jobs. What makes this harder is that the swifter the transition, the more likely we are to avoid more serious consequences. Sadly, some environmentalists have been guilty at times of using this reality as a pretext to demonize an entire industry of people working in fossil fuels, blanketing blame on everyone in the industry for continued emissions and hence worsening climate change. But this can be overly simplistic if taken out of context and could contribute to a divisive us-vs.-them "otherization,“ perhaps serving no other purpose than trying to find someone for the environmentally conscientious to blame in their quest for a clear conscience. What’s worse, it encourages those working in the fossil-fuel industry to retrench and employ equally simplistic responses and justifications for their work, furthering division rather than unity. In my work as a management consultant, I spent over a year working directly with fossil-fuel-based energy and utility companies. My firsthand experience in the industry exposed me to a cadre of intelligent, hard-working, and practical people who occupied positions ranging from field workers to middle and upper-middle management. To describe any of them as plotters of societal destruction would be laughable.
However, there are people in the fossil-fuel industry and in government who bear an outsized responsibility for the perpetuation of the fossil-fuel status quo, but these are typically a few people at the top - those with a large financial interest who then influence those with a political interest to maintain the status quo. In the example of #ExxonKnew, we’re talking about senior management - those responsible for the strategic direction of the company. If we’re not careful about what we read into that hashtag, we might assume every person at the company was in on a grand conspiracy - but this is almost certainly not the case. This does not diminish the need to stand up to business and government leaders to demand change, but it underscores that we can stand together rather than apart.
The reality is we all, environmentalist and oil rig operator alike, share responsibility for fossil fuel emissions on some level every time we buy or do anything or go anywhere; in fact, we depend on fossil fuels and the people who produce them for most of the material comforts we enjoy (which of us would be ready to go without electricity; clean, running water; abundant, nutritious food; transportation; or heat?). So it’s hypocritical for those of us concerned about the environment to categorically condemn a large, heterogenous group of people for producing the energy we all demand through our consumption and lifestyles, and we should be careful to avoid such sweeping, polarizing polemics.
But the mathematical reality of climate change remains: we need to act collectively and make a series of tradeoffs to avoid catastrophe. Those tradeoffs start with trading in fossil-fuel energy for renewable energy. Consequently, that means trading in jobs producing fossil fuels for jobs producing renewable energy. And unless robots can soon provide for all the needs of those working in fossil fuels, this means fossil-fuel industry workers will need to find other employment. These are real job losses affecting real, good people, our compatriots. Any transition plan for a carbon-neutral society needs to include viable alternatives for those working in the fossil-fuel industry.
Fortunately, the transition to a carbon-neutral society also means lots of new opportunities in the renewable-energy industry. Many of the specialized skills and much of the same knowledge that have served people well in producing fossil fuels (construction, engineering, equipment maintenance, finance, project management, sales, marketing, human resources, etc.) are largely transferable to producing renewable energy. As one industry needs to ramp down, another needs to ramp up. Many of the same people whose jobs will be eliminated in producing fossil fuels can redeploy in the rapidly expanding renewable-energy sector.
It’s true that producing energy from fossil fuels and from renewable sources are not exactly the same thing. There will need to be some re-education and training to enable people to make the transition. Fortunately, estimates suggest the costs of such training will not be prohibitive. And given my experience with people working in the fossil-fuel industry, I’m confident in their ability to reapply their intelligence and skills in contexts outside fossil fuels.
It's scary to think about change, particularly on such a large scale. But it's also scary to think about the alternative: leaving a world that is unrecognizably degraded to the next generation and causing greater human suffering to our materially less fortunate brothers and sisters living now around the world. The math dictates a major change in course to avoid serious consequences, a course change that will require everyone working together. So let's team up and work together, rather than against each other, toward a cleaner, brighter future.