Paris Climate Agreement Oil Companies

The report also concluded that oil and gas companies risked “wasting” $2,200 billion on new projects by 2030 if governments applied stricter restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions. “The aim is to maintain public support on this issue while respecting a binding policy,” the report says. Spending showed “the growing gap between oil companies` efforts to get a positive picture of the climate and their lobbying and actual business decisions,” he says. Total, Repsol, Shell and BP significantly downgraded their depreciation price assumptions last year, at least in part due to the energy transition. While this may be partly a virtue of necessity, given that previous depreciation assumptions are slightly higher than prevailing prices, these companies now have a much more conservative outlook than their European counterparts. Both Total and Repsol are based on oil prices, which refer to the IEA`s sustainable development scenario and fall in the long term; Shell and BP expect flat outlooks at comparable levels. In the three years since most of the world`s nations signed the Paris climate agreement, major oil and gas companies have injected more than $100 billion into their fossil fuel infrastructure. That`s more than 10 times the amount spent by the same companies on low-carbon investments, despite outright declarations in this area, according to a new report. At present, no oil and gas company can claim that a transition plan will be adapted to the paris agreement`s goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius or below. Nevertheless, integrated European oil and gas companies are miles ahead of their non-European competitors. Last year, we evaluated 42 oil and gas companies outside Europe; None was adapted to the benchmarks of the TPI Paris Agreement, and only one (Petrobras) had a scope 3 emission target – which unfortunately was recently recovered. “While many of their peers represent an improvement, they have only committed to reducing the carbon intensity of the energy they produce, which means they can continue to increase fossil fuel production – increase CO2 emissions as a whole and leave the risk of failed assets. Our climate system works on finite limits, so the strategies that allow infinite growth are a square stake in a round hole.┬áThe investor signal is received by oil and gas companies.

At first, many companies began to address emissions within their own borders (directly, Scope 1 and indirectly, Scope 2 emissions), but they do not take responsibility for emissions related to the expected use of their products – that is, the burning of fossil fuels (within Scope 3). But downstream emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are the main source of oil and gas emissions, which account for about 70-90% of the lifecycle emissions of petroleum products and 60-85% of natural gas emissions. BP said its strategy for producing cheap, low-carbon oil and gas was in line with the International Energy Agency`s (IEA) forecasts and the Paris agreement. Over the past six months, Europe`s oil and gas-rich oil and gas companies have announced voluntary targets to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions that go beyond their own operational emissions.


Related posts