Nobody is really planning for a fossil fuel phaseout
Analysis by Shannon Osaka, The Washington Post, Dec. 20, 2023
Last week, world leaders celebrated a climate first: a call by nearly 200 countries to “transition away” from fossil fuels. Many heralded the agreement as a new phase in climate talks and the beginning of the end of fossil fuels.
But beneath the U.N. agreement lies a darker truth: No fossil fuel company or country has a real plan for phasing out fossil fuels. On the contrary, almost all expect to continue extracting coal, oil and gas far into the future — far beyond what is needed to cut emissions in line with climate goals of keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), or even 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).
And part of the reason is that almost every country and company sees itself in a unique position: as the future last producer of fossil fuels.
“Every country has their own reason why they should be the last,” said Michael Lazarus, a senior scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute and one of the authors of the Production Gap Report, which analyzed countries’ plans for fossil fuel expansion.
In recent years, the gap between countries’ plans for fossil fuels — and the downward trajectory needed to hit climate goals — has become a yawning chasm. According to the Production Gap Report, a project of the U.N. Environment Program and research groups, countries’ projections and plans for fossil fuel production in 2030 are more than double the amount needed for a 1.5-degree Celsius warming limit.
The report analyzed fossil fuel production estimates from the governments of 20 large fossil fuel-producing countries, including the United States, Russia, Mexico and the United Arab Emirates. By 2050, the gap is projected to be even larger — according to the study, countries expect to produce 2½ times more fossil fuels in 2050 than would align with a target of 2 degrees Celsius.
At that threshold, scientists predict higher sea level rise, increased extreme heat and a greater possibility of crossing catastrophic tipping points than at 1.5.
“It’s a complete disconnect between what governments are planning for and what is required to meet Paris goals,” said Greg Muttitt, a senior associate at the International Institute for Sustainable Development.
Part of the reason for that disconnect, Lazarus said, is that many countries think they should keep producing fossil fuels while others stop. Norway, for example — which generates almost all of its electricity from renewables and has one of the highest percentages of electric vehicles in the world — touts the low carbon intensity of its oil and gas and argues that its exports are essential to Europe’s energy security.
Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states argue that they can produce oil and gas at lower cost than their competitors; the United States plans for its emissions to be “abated” through carbon capture and storage so they won’t pollute the atmosphere.
The result is nations rushing to gain the upper hand and market share before the world turns more solidly toward renewables. “There’s a rush to produce while the social license remains somewhat intact,” Lazarus said.
And oil and gas companies are doing the same thing. While some are paying lip service to the idea of switching to renewables (largely European majors) or building out carbon capture and storage (largely U.S. majors), their investments in these areas are minuscule.
According to an analysis from the International Energy Agency, fewer than 3 percent of fossil fuel companies’ capital expenditures — the amount they spend on physical things — now fund clean energy. By 2050, the agency projects, 50 percent of those expenditures should support clean energy if the world hopes to hit its climate goals.
Carbon capture and storage faces similar headwinds. Each year the world captures only 45 million tons of the CO2 produced by fossil fuels — a rounding error compared with the over 36 billion tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere. And a lot of the CO2 that is captured ultimately goes into drilling for more oil.
But just like world leaders, many oil and gas companies seem to be betting they’ll survive beyond their peers. “Some oil companies thus seem to be planning to be among the last producers standing,” Jason Bordoff, the director of the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy, wrote recently.
Climate change has always been filled with contradictions — those who use the smallest amount of fossil fuels suffer the worst impacts, for example. But in recent years, the fossil fuel contradiction has become the largest of all. More than 2,000 fossil fuel lobbyists were estimated to attend the most recent climate summit in Dubai; this year, the United States is projected to extract more oil and gas than ever before and is currently producing more oil than any country in history.
“We can’t solve the climate crisis without solving the biggest cause of it, which is fossil fuels,” said Kelly Trout, the research co-director of Oil Change International.
But many countries appear to believe they can do just that.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/12/20/fossil-fuel-companies-phase-out/