Stop calling natural gas "natural," demand anti-natural gas groups

They say the term "natural" misleads the public about the damage caused by natural gas.

Anti-fossil fuels groups are demanding that companies cease using the term “natural gas” to describe natural gas because, they say, there is nothing natural about natural gas, so naturally, it should not be called natural:

There’s nothing natural about fracking; there’s nothing natural about thousands of miles of pipelines and there’s nothing natural about the indoor air pollution that is associated with gas,” said Caleb Heeringa, campaign director of the environmental advocacy group Gas Leaks. 

Another claimed that oil and gas companies started calling methane “natural gas” as a marketing gimmick because it sounds wholesome:

Take it as a sign that natural doesn’t necessarily mean “good for you,” no matter how nice it sounds. Americans love “natural” potato chips, but they’re still just deep-fried potatoes.

Also, using the word “natural” is a marketing term that is misleading:

They also want to crack down on specific terminology employed by oil firms to soften public perception of their activities. These include: ‘natural’ and ‘green’ gas, which the groups say are inherently misleading when used in reference to methane, since ‘natural’ misleads consumers into thinking that methane is environmentally friendly instead of a potent greenhouse gas, and adopting stricter guidance against misleading terms such as ‘renewable natural gas.’

These groups like to be called “environmentalists,” but in reality, as Robert Bryce exposed, they are nothing but anti-fossil NGOs that raise hundreds of millions of dollars annually to promote their anti-human agendas.

Their campaign seeks to convince the Federal Trade Commission to officially ban the word “natural gas” in its Green Guides, which govern environmental marketing claims. In other words, these groups want the FTC to legally ban energy companies from referring to natural gas as natural gas.

This is especially interesting because last year, the European Union approved natural gas as a green energy source which would be added to the E.U. Taxonomy, the official guide to green energy in the E.U. I suppose these American “green” groups will next sue the E.U. to force them to remove natural gas from the E.U. Taxonomy.

These same groups were anti-fracking when the shale revolution was underway in the U.S. starting in the early 2000s because too much natural gas was being discovered. Now they want to ban gas stoves.

This leads to the question: Why do these groups so vociferously hate natural gas? It is the cleanest burning fossil fuel, composed of one carbon atom surrounded by four hydrogen atoms. Strip out the one carbon atom, and what’s left is the dream fuel, hydrogen. All in all, it is so perfect, so abundant, and so versatile that it threatens their beloved replacements, wind and solar.

Natural gas is hated because it is a near-perfect energy source. The only way they can fight against it is to ban its very name and regulate it out of existence, tactics that are all too common these days.