Environmental organizations in the United States praised the recent climate agreement announced on Wednesday for its emphasis on shifting away from fossil fuels. This agreement also gives them a new tool to criticize the Biden administration.

Last year, President Joe Biden approved a significant climate stimulus, while U.S. climate envoy John Kerry played a crucial part in the COP28 negotiations in the petrostate of United Arab Emirates. However, environmental advocates are still dissatisfied with the government’s authorization of fresh oil and natural gas initiatives.

The approved projects, such as the Willow Oil Project in Alaska and the Mountain Valley gas pipeline in Appalachia, produce greenhouse gas emissions that are significantly lower compared to the expected decrease from the increase in clean energy and electric vehicles. However, President Biden’s inability to prevent all fossil fuel developments has been criticized by some environmentalists who believe it may weaken his backing among younger voters before the upcoming election.

“According to Jean Su, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, the Biden administration’s statement in support of phasing out fossil fuels is a significant step in addressing climate change.”

“Why is the Biden administration continuing to increase the use of fossil fuels?”

This marks the first instance in almost 30 years of U.N. climate conferences where countries have reached a consensus to explicitly limit the use of fossil fuels. Though this agreement is not legally binding and grants each nation the freedom to determine their own course of action, the fact that it acknowledges the need to transition away from fossil fuels is considered a significant achievement.

Collin Rees, the U.S. campaigns manager for Oil Change International, stated from Dubai that it is a significant advancement that discussions about moving away from fossil fuels are taking place.

Environmental organizations have increased their criticism towards specific projects that they believe will contribute to the continued use of fossil fuels for many years. This includes the proposed Venture Global liquefied natural gas project in Louisiana, currently being reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Energy Department. This project, known as CP2, is part of a series of LNG facilities constructed in recent times, which have led to the United States becoming the top natural gas exporter globally.

According to Rees, individuals are interested in topics such as CP2 and upcoming choices regarding increasing the production of fossil fuels. They will likely want concrete evidence before making any judgments.

Stevie O’Hanlon, the director of communication for the Sunrise Movement, a group of progressive young activists, cautioned that young voters were increasingly monitoring these initiatives.

“If the [Biden administration officials] continue to approve these projects, their credibility will suffer among the global community and young voters. It is important that these are not just empty promises. President Biden must take action on climate change.”

During his 2020 campaign, Biden made a commitment to halt the production of new oil and gas on federal land and water, which resonated with young activists focused on climate change. However, the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the economic impacts of the pandemic caused chaos in the global energy market, resulting in a significant increase in crude oil prices and record-breaking gasoline prices in the U.S., reaching over $5 per gallon.

The need to address rising energy costs caused the administration to shift their approach to the oil and gas industry, resulting in the release of approximately 200 million barrels of crude oil from the U.S. strategic reserve. This move also encouraged oil companies to increase their production, leading to record high levels of U.S. output.

Although the Republican National Committee wasted no time in claiming that the COP28 results were a reflection of “Biden’s anti-U.S. energy agenda,” experts who study public opinion do not believe that the global agreement reached in Dubai will significantly impact the opinions of American voters in the upcoming presidential election.

John Kotcher, a research associate professor at George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication, believes that if climate change is a significant topic in the upcoming ’24 elections, it will bring attention to the differences in how the two parties approach the issue.

The results of surveys conducted by GMU and Yale show that most Americans support the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., regardless of other countries’ actions. However, approximately 25% of Republicans believe that the U.S. should only decrease its emissions if other industrialized nations do the same. This aligns with the agreement, according to Kotcher.

According to Anthony Leiserowitz, the director and founder of the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, due to the predominant media coverage of the war in Ukraine and the Israeli offensive in Gaza, only a small portion of Americans will be interested in this agreement.

The COP event is just one part of a larger discussion about the future of energy policy in the nation, according to him. He believes that it will not have a significant impact on voters and most of them may not even be aware of its occurrence.