The new report finds that wealthy nations — the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Norway, and Australia — planning to approve and subsidize new fossil fuel projects which undermines their recent claims of leadership in addressing the climate crisis.
Reports
Canada’s Big Oil Reality Check: Major oil and gas producers undercut Canada’s commitment to 1.5ºC
The assessment by Environmental Defence Canada and Oil Change International assesses eight of Canada’s top oil and gas producers, including Imperial (ExxonMobil) and Shell. It finds they are all on track to increase their oil and gas production in Canada, rather than planning a fair transition away from fossil fuels that are fuelling the climate crisis.
Past Last Call: G20 public finance institutions are still bankrolling fossil fuels
Our new report “Past Last Call: G20 public finance institutions are still bankrolling fossil fuels” looks at G20 country and MDB public finance for fossil fuels from 2018-2020 for the first time and finds they are still backing at least USD 63 billion per year in oil, gas, and coal projects.
The Sky’s Limit Africa: The Case for a Just Energy Transition from Fossil Fuel Production in Africa
The Sky’s Limit Africa assesses fossil fuel industry plans to sink USD $230 billion into the development of new extraction projects in Africa in the next decade — and USD $1.4 trillion by 2050. It finds these projects are not compatible with a safe climate future and that they are at risk of becoming stranded assets that leave behind unfunded clean-up, shortfalls of government revenue, and overnight job losses.
Watershed: The Turning Point for North Sea Oil & the Just Transition
Released ahead of crucial UN climate talks in Glasgow, Scotland, this report examines why UK and Scottish Government policy to maximise oil and gas extraction from the North Sea is incompatible with stated commitments to the Paris Agreement goal of limiting dangerous warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (ºC).
Report: Indigenous Resistance Against Carbon
The report highlights and analyzes 26 Indigenous frontline struggles in the past decade against a variety of fossil fuel projects across Turtle Island over all stages of the fossil fuel development chain. Our analysis reveals that Indigenous resistance to carbon over the past decade has stopped projects equivalent to 400 new coal-fired power plants, or roughly 345 million new passenger vehicles. Additionally, Indigenous resistance has helped shift public debate around fossil fuels and Indigenous Rights, while averting lock-in of carbon-intensive projects.
Unused Tools: How Central Banks Are Fueling the Climate Crisis
There is growing recognition that central banks must act to confront the climate crisis. They have the tools to catalyze and accelerate the end of financing for fossil fuels – through monetary policy, regulatory action, and excluding fossil fuel assets from their own portfolios. But, with only limited exceptions, they are not using these tools. This report identifies 10 criteria for assessing central banks against the Paris Agreement’s objective, and applies them to assess 12 major central banks.
Banking on Climate Chaos 2021: Fossil Fuel Finance Report
This report analyzes fossil fuel financing from the world’s 60 largest commercial and investment banks — aggregating their leading roles in lending and underwriting of debt and equity issuances — and reveals that these banks poured a total of USD $3.8 trillion into fossil fuels from 2016–2020.
Doubling Back and Doubling Down: G20 Scorecard on Fossil Fuel Funding
In this new report we consider recovery commitments and pre-pandemic policies to rank G20 countries’ progress in phasing out support to fossil fuels. We find at least USD 584 billion per year between 2017 and 2019 in public support for fossil fuels from G20 governments.
Fracking Fiasco: The Banks That Fueled the U.S. Shale Bust
A new report by Oil Change International and Rainforest Action Network (RAN) shows how major banks have continued pouring money into fracking companies in recent years despite numerous warnings that the sector was financially unsustainable — on top of the well-documented environmental, health and climate impacts of the industry.