Climate activists bring banners, signs, and a letter to demand that Governor Healey ban new fossil fuel infrastructure as the first step to a rapid and just decarbonization that will prevent runaway global heating and an uninhabitable Earth. 

 

BOSTON, MA —  Members of the Boston chapter of Extinction Rebellion demonstrated at the State House during Governor Maura Healey's inauguration Thursday morning to call for a ban on all new fossil fuel infrastructure in the state. Activists delivered a letter addressed to Governor Healey and her newly appointed climate chief, Melissa Hoffer, inviting them to meet with Extinction Rebellion members regarding their demands. 

 

They brought colorful banners and flags, singing and chanting to draw attention to the state's level of climate inaction thus far. 

 

Extinction Rebellion demonstrators said that Healey is taking on her position at a crucial crossroads for Massachusetts. "Our intention is to deliver the clear message: No New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure," said activist Jamie McGonagill, "So the incoming gubernatorial team knows to expect pressure from us every day of their term." Under Governor Healey's leadership, we can either continue on with a slow, gradual decarbonization plan that allows for the fossil fuel companies to keep up their quarterly profits but puts the entire world at grave risk, or she can take the bold action needed to prevent the worst impacts of climate breakdown.

 This is perhaps the most important decade of the 21st century. It is the decade in which we must rapidly switch away from fossil fuel consumption and from wholesale destruction of the natural environment to a regenerative society. 

 

On Governor Healey's campaign website, climate was the first on her list of issues. In her climate plan, she highlighted her plans to "keep carbon in the ground" and to "electrify everything."1 She also pledged that, in her administration, in order to achieve the requirement in the MA 2021 Climate Act “that, over the next eight years, we reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent below 1990 levels,” “all agencies and programs will use the best science and forward-looking climate data in their planning and decision-making." However, these legally binding targets are not possible with the creation of new fossil fuel infrastructure that will be in operation for decades.

Since 1990, governments around the world have acknowledged that we must stop burning fossil fuels in order to avoid catastrophic climate change, yet have failed to put words into sufficient action. At this year’s COP27, the USA refused to agree to phase out government subsidies for fossil fuels, even as scientists warn that we may pass 1.5C global warming as early as 2030. It’s clear that even incremental improvement–improvement that would allow us to align with science-based targets–is being blocked by the fossil fuel lobbyists and government inaction. 

 

It was also recently reported by the Boston Globe2 that Massachusetts is woefully behind on our current climate goals, which are in and of themselves the bare minimum and not in accordance with the best-case scenarios outlined in the IPCC report. This can hardly be seen as climate leadership. 

 

According to the Globe, “Boston is so far behind on climate progress that cutting greenhouse emissions in half by the critical milepost of 2030 is already out of reach, a new assessment has found, and reaching the goal of net zero emissions by 2050 will require a decades-long, all-in effort. The report blamed a decade or more of stalled action at the city, state, and federal levels, and said that dramatic changes must now begin.” 

 

With this in mind, it is financially irresponsible and hopelessly naive for Massachusetts to be building new infrastructure to facilitate the flow of fossil fuels into our state. No, we can’t turn off the fossil fuel faucet tomorrow. But we don’t need to be building new pipes and connections for future fossil fuel flow, infrastructure that is intended to last decades and cost MA taxpayers at a time when, per the best science we have, all our energy investment should be going towards renewable energy infrastructure.