The call in the final text of the UN climate conference COP28 for a “transitioning away from fossil fuels” means nothing because it constitutes little more than naïve handwaving. There is near-zero likelihood that the world will, or could, significantly reduce much less eliminate its dependence on fossil fuels.
For example, the global transportation system is almost totally fossil fuel-powered, and it produces about a quarter of all energy-related greenhouse gas emissions. In the US, about 91% of transportation energy comes from petroleum. So, a vast transition to renewable sources—electricity and biofuels—would be needed to achieve zero-emissions in transportation, not to mention the rest of the energy system.
That transition will not happen, given the profound obstacles renewable energy faces to becoming the world’s predominant energy source. The current share of the global energy supply of solar, wind, hydro, geothermal and ocean energy is only 5.5 percent, and it will not rise to replace the massive contribution of fossil fuels.
Fossil fuel companies’ huge—and highly profitable—investment in production has created an unbridgeable gap between planned expansion and that necessary to meet temperature limits, analyses have found. The year 2030 would see 110% more production than that consistent with a 1.5°C limit, concluded a report by the UN Environment Programme and other groups. By 2040, this production gap would increase to 190% more production than consistent with a 1.5°C pathway and 89% more than consistent with a 2°C pathway, found the report.
Another analysis identified some 425 “carbon bombs”—oil and gas projects that would emit more than a billion tons of CO2 over their lifetimes. The researchers found that if these projects go forward, their emissions would be twice as large as those required to meet the 1.5°C limit.
US oil and gas production is also on track for major increases over the next decades, according to an environmental group consortium. The resulting fuel use could release by 2050 the equivalent lifetime emissions of a thousand coal-fired power plants.
And global coal use is on track to reach a record high, mainly due to rising demand in China and India.
True, oil companies did reduce their planned exploration investments because of the COVID-19 pandemic and lobbying by climate activists. In 2020, ExxonMobil announced that it would invest about $20-$25 billion annually on exploration and development over the following five years—less than the previously projected $30 billion. However, such investment continues to drive major oil and gas production.
In reality, fossil fuel companies could not abandon their reserves, even if they wanted to. They would face huge legal and political obstacles. For one thing, because such strandings would damage corporations, company directors who approved them would be left open to personal lawsuits for breaching their corporate fiduciary duty. Such duty legally requires directors to act in the best interest of the company.
Investors would also suffer major losses due to stranding. One group calculated that policies aimed at limiting temperature increases to the Paris Agreement goal of 2°C would mean that $1.4 trillion in existing projects would lose their value.
Such stranded assets would be a political disaster for any government, given the potential skyrocketing energy prices and enormous investor losses that would result. Another profound economic impact of a major reduction in fossil fuels would be the loss of vast numbers of jobs that depend on the industry—more than one million in the US alone.
Russia represents a prime example of a country that fully recognizes the consequences of climate disruption, but will not rein in its fossil fuel production. The country has experienced storms, heat waves, floods, wildfires, and disease outbreaks that the government acknowledges are linked to climate disruption. However, neither the Russian government nor its oil and gas industry will adopt emission-limiting policies that would compromise an industry critical to its economy.
Indeed, the Climate Action Tracker has rated as “critically insufficient” Russia’s Paris Agreement emission reduction targets. The analysis found that Russia’s Paris Agreement goal is based on business-as-usual emission policies.
Also, Russia recognizes the economic advantages of a warmer climate in opening new ice-free shipping lanes and rendering vast areas of its northern regions amenable to crop production.
Nor will China abandon its lucrative oil and gas deposits, continuing to explore for new resources. For example, it announced in 2021 discovery of a major new oil reserve of one billion tons in the Taklamakan Desert, its largest oil and gas-bearing area.
The failure to adopt adequate emission reduction targets by Russia, China, Brazil, and Australia would produce a global temperature increase of 5°C, found an analysis by the Paris Equity Check.
A premier example of the futility of a fossil fuel “transitioning away” is the tar sands in Alberta, Canada. Not really sands, they are a sludge of sand, clay, water, and molasses-like oily bitumen. This mix must be heated to separate the oil before refining. The Alberta tar sands represent the world’s third-largest oil reserves, about 166 billion barrels. Total production was about 2.8 million barrels a day in 2017.
Tar sands are notoriously dirty fuel sources. Producing one gallon of gasoline from the sludge emits about 15% more CO2 than from conventional oil. Tar sands are so carbon-polluting that energy economists Christophe McGlade and Paul Ekins concluded that they must be totally abandoned if global temperature increases are to be limited to 2°C. They also aren’t a sound investment. ExxonMobil has even removed tar sands from its proven reserves, basically admitting that they are not an economic resource.
Nevertheless, amid considerable controversy, the industry has begun building a $12.6 billion expansion of a pipeline to transport tar sands oil from Alberta to the Canadian West Coast.
(Dennis Meredith is the author of The Climate Pandemic: How Climate Disruption Threatens Human Survival.)