G20 governments continue to provide billions of dollars for the production and consumption of fossil fuels. This report finds that they provide at least USD $63.9 billion per year in government support to the production and consumption of coal alone, with almost three-quarters of the support identified being directed to coal-fired power production.
The European Investment Bank (EIB) is the world’s largest multilateral lender, bigger even than the World Bank. As a public bank, it’s tasked with providing finance in the EU public interest, and it has an outsized influence on the EU’s energy system because of the private investment it can “crowd in” and the sheer amount of money it has at its disposal.
Our new report reveals, for the first time, the climate impact of North Sea oil and gas extraction, and shows the way to a job-creating energy transition. To deal with the climate emergency, the UK needs to immediately stop approving new oil and gas drilling and redirect support to clean jobs and renewable energy.
Despite moderate progress in the 2017 budget, Canada remains the largest provider of fiscal support to oil and gas production in the G7 relative to the size of its economy.
This report reveals the disconnect between Canada’s promises on climate change and the actions of its official export credit agency, Export Development Canada (EDC), in propping up the oil and gas industry.
Donald Trump can’t stop the sun from shining
Even before the G7 meeting – or G6 plus one meeting in Canada – the signs are that it will be chaotic and deeply antagonistic, with spats over trade, tariffs and Russia, to say the least.
“It’s cynical and reckless to provide relief for climate-related disasters with one hand, while essentially paying Big Oil to worsen the climate crisis with the other. Transferring billions of dollars from hard-working taxpayers to ultra-rich oil companies to extract more fossil fuels will not make our country safer or stronger.”
A study published today, by a group led by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), indicates that eliminating fossil fuel subsidies could curb global greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 5% through 2030 while saving hundreds of billions of dollars in public money. Despite this seemingly good news, the framing of the study was strangely downbeat, casting these reductions as “only a small effect on CO2 emissions.” What we know from reading the actual findings of this study, as well as several other analyses of the climate impacts of fossil fuel subsidy removal, is that nixing oil, gas, and coal subsidies would be a big win for the climate, would saves money, and could free up resources to help the poorest and most vulnerable.
Today, more than 30 environmental, health and social justice organizations urged Congressional leaders to exclude an extension of the tax credit for carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery from any spending bill.