From the Paris agreement to COP28, how oil and gas giants try to influence


From the Paris Agreement to COP28, how oil and gas giants try to influence the global climate agenda is elaborated on by Alain Naef, ESSEC We all knew that the Energy giants spent $1bn on climate lobbying.


The image above is Sadi-Santos/Shutterstock


There is “no science” behind demands to phase out fossil fuels, according to the current COP president. This level of cynicism at the top of the annual climate summit makes it less surprising that the conference has also been used as an oil trading venue.

A record number of fossil fuel lobbyists gained access to the conference this year. So it seems to presage a bright future for fossil fuels, when it should be a venue to discuss how to stop using them.

But this is not the first time that the international climate agenda has been “hijiacked” by oil companies. In 2015, a few months before COP21 – the summit that lead to the Paris agreement, a comprehensive global agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emission by all countries in the world – six oil majors including BP, Shell and Total, wrote an open letter calling for a carbon tax on companies’ CO2 emissions. Under such a scheme, the more a company pollutes, the more it is taxed.

The oil majors suggested a two step approach. First, implement a carbon tax in all countries. And then – and this is where it gets complicated – they wanted all nations to get in a room and agree on the scheme. In their letter, the six oil majors said they wanted to “create an international framework that could eventually connect national systems”.

But carbon taxes are difficult to implement because of the international coordination they require to be effective. To make a carbon tax work, every country in the world would need to participate. Otherwise there would be what policymakers call carbon leakage.

This is when businesses simply transfer production to other countries with no – or more relaxed – emissions rules. If China started taxing its companies for the CO² they emit but the US refused, for example, it would be less competitive – its taxed products would be more expensive than those from the US.

Getting Russia, China and the US to agree on an international deal today seems near impossible. So any talk that advocates for an international carbon tax is cheap.

Oil majors as climate activists?

Some oil companies understand that public opinion on climate change is shifting and are starting to reflect this in their public actions. Exxon’s CEO, Darren Woods,urged then-US president Donald Trump to stay in the Paris agreement after Trump announced plans to withdraw the US in 2017. This decision was later reversed by Biden. Woods and Exxon also publicly advocate for a carbon tax.

As some of the world’s most polluting companies, oil producers surely have an interest in avoiding such taxes. But my recent research shows that 54% of oil and gas companies with a policy on carbon taxes support them (78% of the 50 largest firms by reserves). Among the 100 largest globally, I found 19 in favour of carbon taxes and 16 against them. 49 fossil fuel companies, mostly smaller operators, have no public position on the issue.

From the Paris agreement to COP28, how oil and gas giants try to influence the global climate agenda Barrels of oil with an industrial plant in the background, blue sky and clouds or smoke.
Fossil fuel production and use contributes a lot to global emissions.

So why do oil companies support a carbon tax?

In June 2021, undercover interviews conducted by Greenpeace activists who posed as headhunters to interview a lobbyist for ExxonMobil, showed the lobbyist claiming to support a carbon tax because it would be politically impossible to implement.

The lobbyist concerned later apologised, saying he was embarrassed that he “allowed myself to fall for Greenpeace’s deception”. And ExxonMobil’s Woods condemned the statements made during the interview. He said they don’t “represent the company’s position” and that the lobbyist was never involved in developing corporate policy on the issue.

Nevertheless, that’s one theory for fossil fuel company support – if there’s no real risk of a carbon tax being implemented. It’s like supporting the introduction of CO²-eating unicorns to reduce atmospheric CO². The idea is beautiful but impractical.

One way around potential deadlock is to establish a carbon border tax. The EU wants to do this with its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). This would place a carbon tax on any goods produced abroad that have not already been taxed in their country of production – it’s essentially a customs tax for countries that refuse to implement a carbon tax.

This tax could be a solution, if the World Trade Organization (WTO) doesn’t deem it against free trade rules. It recently launched a taskforce to review the CBAM after some WTO members called it “protectionist”.

But while everyone waits for “unicorn” climate solutions to be implemented, major oil companies continue to profit and generate more emissions. For real change to happen, fossil fuel companies need to be encouraged to transition to cleaner energy using incentives, as well as stronger limits on fossil fuel extraction – an issue set to be top of the agenda during the last days of COP28.


Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 20,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Alain Naef, Assistant Professor, Economics, ESSEC

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.



COP28 clashes over fossil fuel phase-out after OPEC pushback


COP28 clashes over fossil fuel phase-out after OPEC pushback by  and  cannot be more clear about the various vested interests of each party.


  • Some members balk at fossil fuel phase-out inclusion
  • Saudi, Russia push for focus on emissions not fuels
  • Nations most affected by climate change demand its inclusion

DUBAI, Dec 9 (Reuters) – Some countries are resisting a pledge to phase-out fossil fuels in a COP28 climate deal, jeopardising attempts for U.N. climate talks to deliver a hard commitment for the first time in 30 years on ending the use of oil and gas.

Observers in the negotiations said Saudi Arabia and Russia were insisting that COP28 focus only on reducing climate pollution – with no mention of the fossil fuels causing it.

Earlier this week, OPEC sent a letter urging its members and oil producing allies to reject any mention of fossil fuels in the final summit deal. The letter warned that “undue and disproportionate pressure against fossil fuels may reach a tipping point” in the talks.

In a statement to Reuters, OPEC Secretary General Haitham Al Ghais declined to comment on the letter, but said OPEC wanted to keep the summit’s focus on reducing climate-warming emissions, and away from their main source – coal, oil and gas.

[2/4]United Arab Emirates Minister of Industry and Advanced Technology and COP28 President Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber attends a press conference at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, December 8, 2023. REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya/File Photo Acquire Licensing Rights

“The world requires major investments in all energies, including hydrocarbons,” he said. “Energy transitions must be just, fair and inclusive.”

It was the first time OPEC’s Secretariat has intervened in the U.N. climate talks with such a letter.

“It indicates a whiff of panic,” said Alden Meyer of think-tank E3G.

Saudi Arabia is an OPEC member. Russia is a member of the so-called OPEC+ group.

By insisting on focusing on emissions rather than fossil fuels, the two countries appeared to be leaning on the promise of expensive carbon capture technology, which the U.N. climate science panel says cannot take the place of reducing fossil fuel use worldwide.

[3/4]Haitham Al Ghais, Secretary General of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), attends a news conference in Mexico City, Mexico March 9, 2023. REUTERS/Henry Romero/File Photo Acquire Licensing Rights

On the other side, at least 80 countries including the United States, European Union and many poor, climate-vulnerable nations are demanding that a COP28 deal call clearly for an eventual end to fossil fuel use.

Other countries including India and China have not explicitly endorsed a fossil fuel phase-out at COP28, but have backed a popular call for boosting renewable energy.

Ireland’s former president, Mary Robinson, who heads a group of former world leaders known as the Elders, said the letter showed OPEC was “worried” about the trajectory of the COP28 talks.

[4/4]OPEC logo is seen in this illustration taken, October 8, 2023. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/File Photo Acquire Licensing Rights


“Russia and Saudi Arabia are on the wrong side of this and will probably be pushing hard,” Robinson said. “We really have to make sure that the tipping point tips the right way.”


With the summit’s scheduled to end on Tuesday, government ministers from the nearly 200 countries at the Dubai summit have joined in trying to resolve the fossil fuel impasse.

Climate-vulnerable countries said a rejection of a fossil fuel mention at COP28 would threaten the entire world.

“Nothing puts the prosperity and future of all people on earth, including all of the citizens of OPEC countries, at greater risk than fossil fuels,” said Marshall Islands climate envoy Tina Stege in a statement.

The Marshall Islands, which faces inundation from climate-driven sea level rise, currently chairs the High Ambition Coalition group of nations pushing for stronger emissions-cutting targets and policies.

To meet the global goal of holding climate warming to within 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial temperatures, the coalition “is pushing for a phase out of fossil fuels, which are at the root of this crisis,” she said. “1.5 is not negotiable, and that means an end to fossil fuels.”

The latest version of the negotiating text, released Friday, shows countries were still considering a range of options – from agreeing to a “phase out of fossil fuels in line with best available science”, to phasing out “unabated fossil fuels”, to including no mention at all.

Germany’s climate envoy Jennifer Morgan said counties were “moving into the critical stage of negotiations”.

“It is time for all countries to remember what is at stake,” she said. “I am concerned that not all are constructively engaging.”

Asked about the OPEC letter, COP28 Director General Majid Al Suwaidi avoided the term “fossil fuels” but said the United Arab Emirates, as president of the summit, wanted a deal to get the world on track to limit warming to 1.5 C.

“Our COP president … clearly wants to see an outcome that is as ambitious as possible, and we believe we are going to deliver it,” he told a news conference.

Speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, Samoa’s environment minister, Cedric Schuster, worried that this year’s talks were getting bogged down by disputes.

“We are extremely concerned about the pace of negotiations given the limited time we have left here in Dubai,” he told the summit from the main stage on Saturday.

“A target for renewables cannot be a substitute for a stronger commitment to fossil fuel phase-out and an end to fossil fuel subsidies,” he said. “COP28 needs to deliver both.”

For daily comprehensive coverage on COP28 in your inbox, sign up for the Reuters Sustainable Switch newsletter here.

Reporting by Kate Abnett, Valerie Volcovici, Yousef Saba, David Stanway, Simon Jessop, Elizabeth Piper and William James; Editing by Katy Daigle, William Mallard and David Evans.



Methane Pledge by the ‘Giants Behind the Climate Crisis’ Falls ‘Well Short’


Methane Pledge in the COP28 by the ‘Giants Behind the Climate Crisis’ Falls ‘Well Short’ of What Is Needed as per Human Wrongs Watch of today.  And yet some $500 billion annual stimulus for sustainable development was understood to have been made last year.

.The above image is for illustration and is of Al Khaleej Today


UN Secretary-General António Guterres on Sunday [] sent a strong message to the oil and gas industry: the pledges made at COP28 in Dubai fall well short of what’s needed to meaningfully tackle the climate crisis.

© Unsplash/Patrick Hendry | The burning of fossil fuels is driving climate change.

As the fourth day of this year’s UN climate conference got underway, the UN chief stated: “The fossil fuel industry is finally starting to wake up, but the promises made clearly fall short of what is required.”


Reacting to the pledge announced on Saturday by several major oil and gas companies to reduce methane leaks from their pipelines by 2030, Mr. Guterres said it is a “step in the right direction”, but the promise failed to address a core issue, namely, eliminating emissions from fossil fuel consumption.

Methane (CH4) is a primary component of natural gas and is responsible for about a third of the planetary warming we see today.

It is short-lived but is more powerful than carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas most responsible for climate change. Without serious action, global anthropogenic methane emissions are projected to rise by up to 13 per cent between now and 2030.

UN agencies tell you here what you need to know about methane.

Dubbing the oil and gas companies, the “giant behind the climate crisis”, the Secretary-General also pointed out that the pledge did not provide clarity on the pathway to reaching net-zero by 2050, which is “absolutely essential to ensure integrity.”

“Science is clear: we need to phase out fossil fuels within a timeframe compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5 Celsius,” he reiterated, referring to one of the keystone targets set by the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement.

“There must be no room for greenwashing,” he said, referring to the dangers involved in promoting deceptive marketing and false claims of sustainability.

Find out more here about the tactics of ‘greenwashing’.

Early Warning for All

The groundbreaking Early Warnings for All Initiative launched by the Secretary-General last year aims to protect everyone from hazardous weather, water or climate through life-saving early warning systems by the end of 2027.

“This is an ambitious goal – but it is achievable. To make it a reality, we need all hands-on deck – collaborating and cooperating in a way that has not been done before,” he told delegates at Sunday’s main event on the issue.

Mr. Guterres also launched a new report prepared by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) and the UN World Meteorological Organization (WMO), which shows that more lives are being protected from extreme weather and dangerous climate change impacts, but the pace of progress remains insufficient.

So far,101 countries reported having an early warning system, an increase of six countries compared to last year, doubling of coverage since 2015.

Yet, half of countries globally still do not have adequate multi-hazard early warning systems, the report finds.

The head of UNDRR Mami Mizutori said: “The progress is encouraging but we must not be complacent … with an 80 per cent increase in the number of people affected by disasters since 2015 and half the world still lacking access to early warnings.”

“Early warnings are the low-hanging fruit of climate adaptation. They are not a luxury but a must,” added WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas.


Basic tool to save lives

The UN chief said Early Warnings for All systems are “the most basic tool for saving lives and securing livelihoods” in a world defined by “escalating climate injustices”.

Worryingly, countries that are vulnerable to extreme weather, especially small island developing States and least developed countries, as well as the entire African continent, have a rate of protection is well below the global average.

“And delayed action leads to more extreme weather events. More deaths. More destruction,” stated the Secretary-General.

Progress so far

Highlighting the progress made over the past year, Mr. Guterres shared examples from several countries:

  • Maldives, Laos and Ethiopia now have dedicated national action plans;
  • Benin has strengthened communications to reach communities at greatest risk; and
  • Fiji’s flash flood warning has been expanded to benefit nearly one million people.

He pointed out that in a world on a fast-track to temperature increase of 3 degrees Celsius, climate vulnerability is bound to escalate.

Therefore, it is critical to cut carbon pollution at an accelerated pace and invest in protecting vulnerable communities from the impact of more frequent and severe climate-related events.

The estimated cost of bringing everyone under the protection of early warning systems would be around $3 billion, “a tiny fraction of the hundreds of billions made by the fossil fuel industry last year.”

Mr. Guterres called for a windfall tax on these profits, and for the money to be used to protect those suffering the worst impacts, encouraging countries to be “bold and ambitious and to double the speed and scale of support in 2024”.

Race to net-zero

During a roundtable on the latest report from his High-Level Expert Group on Net-Zero, the Secretary-General said COP28 is about turning things around, but national governments cannot do it alone.

“Businesses, financial institutions, civil society, cities, states and regions are all critical in the race to net-zero,” he said.

In simple terms, ‘net-zero’ means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to as close to zero as possible.

In March 2022, the UN chief established the expert group to develop stronger and clearer standards for pledges by non-State entities and speed up their implementation.

Ten recommendations in its report, as a ‘how-to’ guide for credible, accountable net-zero pledges.

Reminding the room of his ‘Acceleration Agenda,’ Mr. Guterres called on governments and non-State actors to radically speed-up efforts to cut emissions, for which he highlighted five key elements:

  1. Genuine decarbonization effort to cover all activities, across every link of value chains;
  2. Detailed targets for 2025, 2030 and 2035, in line 1.5 degrees target of the Paris Agreement;
  3. Disclosure of all lobbying, policy engagements and communication campaigns;
  4. Information on efforts to change business models and internal operations to phase out fossil fuels; and
  5. Move towards a just, equitable and accelerated renewables transition.


COP28: Why we need to break our addiction to combustion


COP28: Why we need to break our addiction to combustion by Simon Dalby, Wilfrid Laurier University could well be an impossible dream.  Let us see if we can indulge.

The image above is:

A flare burns off methane and other hydrocarbons as oil pumpjacks operate in the Permian Basin in Midland, Texas. (AP Photo/David Goldman)



Headlines across the world this year focused on fires, including both wildfires and the use of military firepower, in various places.

Combustion is the key to both.

Considering, and rethinking, the role of fuel in our lives helps put in perspective the wars and climate disasters caused by fuel. At the same time, such an exercise also reveals the role of fuel in both creating and mediating global insecurity. Simply put, while it may still be a necessity, fuel is no longer the solution to insecurity that it may have once been.

As COP28 gets underway today in Dubai, world leaders need to focus attention on fuel and the central role it plays in both the climate crisis and human insecurity. Only by doing so can we hope to address the failures of the past few years to grapple with the urgency of climate change action.

Depending on fuel

Much of the discussion about climate security focuses on questions of whether climate change will cause conflict. But looking at the larger links between climate and the disruptions it causes throughout society are a much more useful way of thinking about climate insecurity.

Floods, storm damage, wildfires and droughts all so disruptive that if current trends persist they may make it impossible for some societies to transition towards a sustainable economy.

Countries may disintegrate and induce conflict that makes coping with climate change even harder, a theme that will be on the agenda for the first time in the history of COP at this year’s conference.

As a professor working on security and climate, and the author of a new book synthesizing these issues, it is clear to me that it is time to rethink energy, climate, security and, crucially, fuel.

Fuelling insecurity

While Gaza City was devastated by Israeli bombs in October, nearly simultaneously Acapulco was destroyed by hurricane Otis. In both cases, the disruption or destruction of urban infrastructure endangered local populations.

Electricity and internet blackouts because of the disruption of fuel supplies to run generators are a common occurrence across the world, with South Africa and the hospitals in Gaza being a case-in-point. Across the border from Gaza, Egyptians feared blackouts because of natural gas supply disruptions indirectly caused by the war next door.

Firefighters douse flames while battling a wildfire called the Highland Fire in Aguanga, Calif. (AP Photo/Ethan Swope)

The danger of wildfires will only grow as climate change dries out ecosystems, effectively turning vegetation into potential fuel. This same combustion within engines and furnaces, meanwhile, is also the source of a sizeable percentage of climate changing gases in the atmosphere. Both involve burning fuel.

But the absence of fuel in South African power stations, hospitals in Gaza or for heating Canadian homes in winter also makes people in these places insecure.

Too much fuel in drying forests is aggravating wildfires. Too little fuel in generators presents numerous hazards when electricity isn’t available. Both increasingly require a security response to keep people safe and shore up social arrangements stressed by the disruptions. Security in these circumstances is about maintaining minimal public order so that evacuations can be arranged and relief supplies can be distributed.

Breaking up with fuel

Societies need energy, but if climate insecurities are to be reduced, we need to get it without burning fuel. This will help with reducing greenhouse gas emissions and slowing down climate change and all the disruptions that it is causing. But it will also improve peoples’ safety in other ways, too.

Fears of cold winters in Europe without Russian gas, electricity blackouts in Egypt, failing hospitals in Gaza and much else are due to their dependence on fuel. Failure to get diesel, natural gas and petroleum to where it is needed is, in part, because of long supply lines that are easily disrupted by political and economic actions.

In addition to cutting off fuel in Gaza, Israeli attacks destroyed the solar panels at al-Shifa hospital, which, of course, didn’t need fuel to keep at least key operating theatre and water filtration functions going despite the chaos around them.

A motorist fills up the fuel tank of a vehicle at a Shell station in Englewood, Colo. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

Renewable sources of energy, wind power, solar panels, hydro and so on don’t use fuel and are less susceptible to supply disruptions. While there are concerns about the international supplies of key components of renewable energy systems, once solar panels are installed in your neighbourhood, you don’t care if a war in the Middle East causes supply issues; your power supply comes from close by, not the other side of the world.

It’s time to break up with fuel — and global energy supply chains more fundamentally — and aim to live more safely with renewable electricity produced closer to home. This may be a tall order at this year’s COP in Dubai, which is run by the CEO of an oil company whose track record on climate is dubious.

But there is no time to lose in confronting our dependence on fossil fuels, both at the COP and everywhere decisions about energy use are being made.

Despite the dominance of fossil fuel interests in Dubai, COP delegates must demand measures to rapidly reduce the world’s dependence on fossil fuels. Promoting new initiatives like a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty to prevent further fossil fuel developments would be a good start.

Simon Dalby, Professor Emeritus of Geography and Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.




The oil and gas sector must reduce their planet-warming operations


In the recently published IEA article on a special report, it is put simply that to save the climate, the oil and gas sector must reduce their planet-warming operations. 





Oil and gas producers face pivotal choices about their role in the global energy system amid a worsening climate crisis fuelled in large part by their core products, according to a major new special report from the IEA that shows how the industry can take a more responsible approach and contribute positively to the new energy economy.

The Oil and Gas Industry in Net Zero Transitions analyses the implications and opportunities for the industry that would arise from stronger international efforts to reach energy and climate targets. Released ahead of the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, the special report sets out what the global oil and gas sector would need to do to align its operations with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Even under today’s policy settings, global demand for both oil and gas is set to peak by 2030, according to the latest IEA projections. Stronger action to tackle climate change would mean clear declines in demand for both fuels. If governments deliver in full on their national energy and climate pledges, demand would fall 45% below today’s level by 2050. In a pathway to reaching net zero emissions by mid-century, which is necessary to keep the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C within reach, oil and gas use would decline by more than 75% by 2050.

Yet the oil and gas sector – which provides more than half of global energy supply and employs nearly 12 million workers worldwide – has been a marginal force at best in transitioning to a clean energy system, according to the report. Oil and gas companies currently account for just 1% of clean energy investment globally – and 60% of that comes from just four companies.

“The oil and gas industry is facing a moment of truth at COP28 in Dubai. With the world suffering the impacts of a worsening climate crisis, continuing with business as usual is neither socially nor environmentally responsible,” said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. “Oil and gas producers around the world need to make profound decisions about their future place in the global energy sector. The industry needs to commit to genuinely helping the world meet its energy needs and climate goals – which means letting go of the illusion that implausibly large amounts of carbon capture are the solution. This special report shows a fair and feasible way forward in which oil and gas companies take a real stake in the clean energy economy while helping the world avoid the most severe impacts of climate change.”

The global oil and gas industry encompasses a large and diverse range of players – from small, specialised operators to huge national oil companies. Attention often focuses on the role of the private sector majors, but they own less than 13% of global oil and gas production and reserves.

Every company’s transition strategy can and should include a plan to reduce emissions from its own operations, according to the report. The production, transport and processing of oil and gas results in nearly 15% of global energy-related greenhouse emissions – equal to all energy-related greenhouse gas emissions from the United States. As things stand, companies with targets to reduce their own emissions account for less than half of global oil and gas output.

To align with a 1.5 °C scenario, the industry’s own emissions need to decline by 60% by 2030. The emissions intensity of oil and gas producers with the highest emissions is currently five-to-ten times above those with the lowest, showing the vast potential for improvements. Furthermore, strategies to reduce emissions from methane – which accounts for half of the total emissions from oil and gas operations – are well-known and can typically be pursued at low cost.

While oil and gas production is vastly lower in transitions to net zero emissions, it will not disappear – even in a 1.5 °C scenario. Some investment in oil and gas supply is needed to ensure the security of energy supply and provide fuel for sectors in which emissions are harder to abate, according to the report. Yet not every oil and gas company will be able to maintain output – requiring consumers to send clear signals on their direction and speed of travel so that producers can make informed decisions on future spending.

The USD 800 billion currently invested in the oil and gas sector each year is double what is required in 2030 on a pathway that limits warming to 1.5 °C. In that scenario, declines in demand are sufficiently steep that no new long-lead-time conventional oil and gas projects are needed. Some existing oil and gas production would even need to be shut in.

In transitions to net zero, oil and gas is set to become a less profitable and riskier business over time. The report’s analysis finds that the current valuation of private oil and gas companies could fall by 25% from USD 6 trillion today if all national energy and climate goals are reached, and by up to 60% if the world gets on track to limit global warming to 1.5 °C.

Opportunities lie ahead despite these challenges. The report finds that the oil and gas sector is well placed to scale up some crucial technologies for clean energy transitions. In fact, some 30% of the energy consumed in 2050 in a decarbonised energy system comes from technologies that could benefit from the industry’s skills and resources – including hydrogen, carbon capture, offshore wind and liquid biofuels.

However, this would require a step-change in how the sector allocates its financial resources. The oil and gas industry invested around USD 20 billion in clean energy in 2022, or roughly 2.5% of its total capital spending. The report finds that producers looking to align with the aims of the Paris Agreement would need to put 50% of their capital expenditures towards clean energy projects by 2030, on top of the investment required to reduce emissions from their own operations.

The report also notes that carbon capture, currently the linchpin of many firms’ transition strategies, cannot be used to maintain the status quo. If oil and natural gas consumption were to evolve as projected under today’s policy settings, limiting the temperature rise to 1.5 °C would require an entirely inconceivable 32 billion tonnes of carbon captured for utilisation or storage by 2050, including 23 billion tonnes via direct air capture. The amount of electricity needed to power these technologies would be greater than the entire world’s electricity demand today.

“The fossil fuel sector must make tough decisions now, and their choices will have consequences for decades to come,” Dr Birol said. “Clean energy progress will continue with or without oil and gas producers. However, the journey to net zero emissions will be more costly, and harder to navigate, if the sector is not on board.”