Words matter. The words we choose influence perceptions towards objects, topics, events and emotions. Even with one million words in the English language, each matter – just as any high schooler who’s studied George Orwell’s classic 1984 novel can attest.
Thus, it’s incredibly alarming the action extreme environmentalists are taking to both ban and rename natural gas.
Well financed Keep it in the Grounders have tried every trick in the book – from the ironic (protesting petrochemicals while seated in a plastic kayak) to the extreme (damaging critical infrastructure) – to advance their radical agenda. The latest petition for the United States government to ban the term “natural gas” is something truly Orwellian: word manipulation.
As if banning natural gas hookups was not enough.
According to Bloomberg reporting, extreme groups, including Food and Water Watch, want the FTC to outlaw natural gas, substituting it for “fossil gas” or “methane gas.” In their eyes, “fracked gas” would be perfectly appropriate, too.
Of course, this bizarre move begs the question, how is natural gas incorrect? The terminology dates to the early 1800s when naturally occurring gas was captured and used in lighting, home, and industrial uses. Since it wasn’t manufactured from coal or other sources, it was termed natural gas because it formed from long ago deposited organic matter deep underground.
Everything about it was – and continues to be – natural. Yet, natural gas runs counter to the extremists’ view, in which society must rid itself of the clean, abundant energy source or face peril.
Data confirms why activists want the government’s dictate of this word manipulation. As Bloomberg reported, 77% of registered U.S. voters said they have a “favorable opinion of natural gas.” Asked about methane – which is the chemical term for natural gas – and views shift to just 29%. Why? Because methane has been characterized by extremists as a “potent greenhouse gas”, ignoring that use of the natural substance has been instrumental in meeting the energy needs of humanity, providing the many products that make our modern lives possible, and reducing carbon emissions.
Similarly, two Yale University studies found more negative associations to “fracked gas” or “fossil gas” among voters than the factual, widely accepted natural gas phrasing.
“Strategically, campaigners seeking to reduce American reliance on this fossil fuel may find some additional value in using the terms ‘fossil gas’ and ‘fracked gas’,” the Yale University researchers wrote, foreshadowing today’s efforts. We’ve seen editors of news publications across the nation already use the term to connote natural gas negatively.
Handing activists a victory here would take Newspeak propaganda straight from Orwell’s fictional pages into our reality. Stand up for natural gas. Both the term and the product have worked for 200 years, and they are the key to a secure, sustainable energy future.
Words matter – let’s hope the FTC chooses theirs wisely. Or be on the lookout for Orwell’s Thought Police.
Let’s not cede any ground.
