Last week we released a report outlining why Denmark can’t be a climate leader if it expands North Sea oil and gas production as planned.
For the IEA, real scenario reform will require more than risky emissions accounting tricks that punt the burden and costs of reducing emissions to future generations.
A new study released by Oil Change International examines the role of Danish oil and gas production in a Paris-aligned global carbon budget. The report confirms that while Denmark has positioned itself as a global climate leader, its plans to expand North Sea oil and fossil gas extraction would undermine its record of climate action and would be incompatible with achieving its Paris climate commitments.
The third and final installment in a series of blogs on the IEA’s Special Report on gas and energy transitions. This blog discusses the IEA’s analysis of methane leakage and its faith in carbon capture and storage.
The second in a series of blogs on the IEA’s 2019 report on the role of gas in energy transitions. This part explores the climate risks inherent in the report’s main policy prescription.
The IEA latest report on gas all but makes the case against gas as a “bridge fuel”. But still finds a way to push for more of the controversial fuel.
Affirming that “science is not negotiable” in the halls of a UN conference center and acting on that fact in one’s own policy decisions can be two different things. What counts for the climate is action to manage a rapid and just transition off of fossil fuels.
For IEA scenario reform, the devil is in the details. The IEA must develop a 1.5°C scenario that is aligned with the goals of the Paris climate agreement and address the concerns of key WEO users. Anything less would be easy to discount as greenwashing or another example of the pro-fossil fuel bias at the IEA.
We’re glad to hear that the IEA is starting to respond to the growing demands from business leaders, government leaders, and civil society members to align its scenarios with Paris. However, the devil is in the details as to whether or not such a scenario from the IEA should earn our applause, and we must withhold judgment until more details are released.
Shell’s climate claims don’t add up – a closer look at the oil giant’s plans.