Article by Stella Levantesi, an Italian climate journalist, photographer and writer. She is the author of the Gaslit series on DeSmog. Her main areas of expertise are climate disinformation, climate litigation and corporate responsibility for the climate crisis.
A new report says major oil companies are not on track to meet the Paris Agreement’s climate goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Eight fossil fuel giants – Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, Total Energies, BP, Eni, Equinor and ConocoPhillips – plan to use 30% of the world’s remaining carbon budget to meet the 1.5°C target, the report said. Report on a major oil company’s actual situation According to the non-profit organization Oil Change International (OCI).
The report says that the oil and gas companies’ combined plans for drilling would cause a temperature rise of more than 2.4 degrees Celsius. This level of warming would: according to Mitigating climate change as proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would reduce food security, risk irreversible loss of ecosystems and lead to increased heatwaves, precipitation and extreme weather.
“We analyzed the climate pledges and plans of eight international oil and gas companies based in North America and Europe. What would it take for oil and gas producers to limit production to 1.5% warming?” David Tong, OCI’s global industry campaign manager and co-author of the report, told DeSmog.
“If oil and gas companies are serious about transforming their business models, the first step should be to stop all new production and set out phase-out plans that are in line with the Paris Agreement,” he added.
“No new fossil fuels” standard
a Recent Publications Researchers from University College London and the International Institute for Sustainable Development Science A report published in May called for an end to fossil fuel expansion and the creation of a “no new fossil fuel” global standard, which the authors said would facilitate a “fossil fuel phase-out” and help meet the climate goals of the Paris Agreement.
In a 1.5°C world, new fossil fuel projects would not be needed because “existing fossil fuel capital stock” would be sufficient to meet energy demand, the authors write. They also note that from economic, political and legal perspectives, blocking new fossil fuel projects is generally more feasible than shutting down existing ones.
Amid continuing global pressure to halt fossil fuel expansion, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Equinor, Eni, ExxonMobil and Total Energies have set targets to increase oil and gas production in the next three years or beyond, according to the OCI report. Shell did not quantify its targets, but said it plans to increase gas production while keeping oil production stable in the near future, the OCI said.
“None of these companies are anywhere near[climate goals],” Tong said. “Six of the eight companies we analyzed have clear plans to increase oil and gas production in this critical decade when we need to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and cut oil, gas and petroleum production.”
Tong added that slowing oil production and expanding gas production, as some companies are planning, is “completely insufficient” compared with what is needed. Efforts to make operations more efficient alone will not be enough, he said.
“This is like tobacco companies claiming they can cure lung cancer by producing cigarettes more efficiently,” he noted. “Not only is this a discredited claim, but it’s also a promise of more efficient climate change solutions.”
Big Oil and the War
The OCI report found that all major oil companies have failed to meet basic standards for just transition plans for the workers and communities in which they operate.
“Many of these companies have ongoing and unresolved allegations of serious human rights violations, and indigenous rights violations,” Tong said.
March 2024 investigationAn investigation commissioned by OCI and conducted by Data Desk found that ExxonMobil, Chevron, Total Energies, BP, Shell and Eni are “complicit in facilitating the supply of crude oil to Israel.” These findings are particularly noteworthy in the context of “mounting evidence of Israeli war crimes” against Palestinians in Gaza, OCI said. state In a new report.
The study found that diesel and gasoline for tanks and other military vehicles are sourced from Israeli refineries and depend on regular crude oil imports by these companies, which from October 2023 onwards will come mainly from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan/Russia, Gabon and Brazil.
The fossil fuel industry is “fueling wars and military conflicts” in many parts of the world, said Svitlana Romanko, a prominent Ukrainian activist and founder and head of Razom We Stand, a Ukrainian group that campaigns for a total ban on fossil fuel imports from Russia.
Romanko said OCI’s Big Oil Reality Check report “reaffirms the importance of moving away from fossil fuels and investing in decentralized renewable energy.”
new analysis A group of climate experts estimated that the first two years of Russia’s war in Ukraine released the equivalent of about 175 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in greenhouse gas emissions, and the global cost of the warming effects of this extreme weather is estimated at $32 billion.
After launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russia Earned Revenues from fossil fuel exports total more than 681 billion euros. European Union countries Purchased It imported fossil fuels from Russia at a cost of over 195 billion euros.
Romanko said the oil giants and Russia were profiting from the war. Since the invasion, BP, Chevron, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Shell and Total Energy have made $219 billion. More than twice as much Profit compared to the previous year.
“Most governments subsidize fossil fuels, and these subsidies amount to trillions of dollars per year,” Romanko said. “This is a big part of fossil fuel profits, and the more fossil fuel subsidies there are, the less investment is available for renewable energy.”
She noted that Total Energies’ partnership with Novatek, Russia’s largest private gas producer, was also “helpful” in helping Russia access technology and engineering services to launch Novatek’s Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2 projects.
Romanko said fossil fuel infrastructure poses a threat to military attack and could quickly become a target.
“Centralized infrastructure puts the energy supply and the overall security of supply at risk,” she said. In Ukraine, a large-scale effort to install solar power plants in schools and hospitals has helped decentralize this vital resource, Romanko explained. “A decentralized energy supply is essential to building true energy independence,” she added. “And this is the future.”
Pressure for accountability
Some of the eight major oil companies listed in the OCI report face greater international and domestic scrutiny than others. Such pressures could foster accountability, but accountability is less likely when fossil fuel companies are closely intertwined with a country’s institutional, political, and economic activities.
“We need to examine why they were successful in putting so much pressure on companies like Shell and BP,” OCI’s Tong said.
One factor is that companies’ home communities work closely with communities in fossil fuel-producing countries. Tong said positive results also come when activists use a range of strategies to call out producers, from nonviolent direct action to op-eds, research and litigation.
“This is particularly difficult for Eni, Total Energies and Equinor as each company has close ties to their home states,” he added.
Public, political and legal pressure for accountability also needs to be coupled with industry regulation, Tong said.
“We have concluded that there is no evidence that the oil and gas industry will voluntarily transition to renewable energy or take action to voluntarily align production levels with those required by the Paris Agreement,” Tong said. The government will no longer approve new production capacity.
The recent gains by right-wing parties in the European Parliament elections could also have an impact on the energy transition for major oil companies.
“The more links between the government and big polluters are revealed, the more people will take to the streets and protest,” Tong said.
What is certain is that if business as usual for Big Oil continues, the impacts of climate change will increase.
“Floods, hurricanes, extreme weather events, and millions of lives affected or lost – these damages to nature, human life and life on Earth will only increase,” Romanko said. “If we allow fossil fuel companies to continue with business as usual, we will see more losses in the coming years.”
