The science says we need to keep fossil fuels in the ground to meet climate goals. We’re pushing back against industry spin saying otherwise.
OVERVIEW OF WORK
The oil and gas industry is on a public relations campaign to convince investors, financial regulators, and the public at large that they deserve continued support as “part of the solution” to the energy transition. Oil Change is working to challenge these narratives and provide analysis to the financial sector, movement allies, and other decision makers to support a shift away from fossil fuel finance. Further, we are working to reform international energy scenarios that currently guide investment decisions towards failure in meeting the Paris Agreement climate goals and, concurrently, are used by the oil and gas industry to justify dangerous expansion plans.
Following years of campaigning and pressure by Oil Change and others, in 2021, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released its first ever fully fledged energy scenario aligned with limiting global warming to 1.5ºC. Critically, the IEA concluded that: “There is no need for investment in new fossil fuel supply in our net zero pathway,” and, therefore, “there are no new oil and gas fields approved for development in our pathway.” We are using the IEA’s conclusion that 1.5ºC alignment means no new oil and gas fields to hold governments, companies, banks, and investors accountable to backing up ‘net zero’ commitments with an end to new oil and gas finance.
LATEST PROGRAM POSTS
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.
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.
When it comes to making decisions on expensive and complex energy infrastructure, investors, governments, and companies look decades into the future. Unfortunately for action on climate change, the IEA's World Energy Outlook has a strong status quo bias.
Last week, some 50 leading scientists, NGOs, investors, politicians and energy experts wrote to the International Energy Agency (IEA) to criticise the world’s top energy body for not aligning its energy forecasts with the latest climate science.
LATEST PROGRAM RESEARCH
The IEA has a crucial opportunity in 2021 to guide the world towards 1.5°C-aligned energy investment. We outline crucial steps the IEA must take to get on track.
The COVID-19 crisis poses a threat to people's health, their jobs and their lives, and like all crises, exacerbates already existing inequalities. Trillions in public finance will be needed to get through the current pandemic. This briefing outlines why continuing to rely on fossil fuels, in particular oil and gas, is not compatible with long-term recovery. It does not make sense to use the COVID-19 stimulus packages to try to revive a sunsetting industry which will not deliver on economic recovery, only to shut it down a few years later to meet climate goals.
This briefing provides a technical analysis of how the International Energy Agency's (IEA) 2019 World Energy Outlook (WEO) continues to steer governments and investors off track in tackling the climate crisis.