October, 30 2024, 08:27am EDT
New Research: UAE, Azerbaijan, and Brazil Undermine Climate Leadership with Massive Fossil Fuel Plans
GLOBAL
New research by Oil Change International shows COP Troika nations – previous, current, and next COP presidents UAE, Azerbaijan, and Brazil – plan to expand oil and gas production 32% by 2035, threatening the climate limits they have collectively pledged to protect.
While Global North countries such as the United States remain the biggest expanders of oil and gas production and have the responsibility and the means to lead in phasing out fossil fuels, the Troika countries have a special duty to lead by example. These three nations chose to host climate talks and have repeatedly committed to submitting 1.5°C-aligned Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) while urging all countries to do so. They must establish the benchmark that 1.5°C-aligned NDCs must include a clear plan to end new oil, coal, and gas projects, as backed by science.
- The projected increase in oil and gas production by 2035, the end date of the NDCs due next year, is 36% for Brazil, 34% for the UAE, and 14% for Azerbaijan. Globally, fossil fuel production must decline by 55% by 2035 to limit warming to 1.5°C, according to the International Energy Agency.
- Together, the Troika nations account for nearly one-third of the carbon pollution at risk from newly approved oil and gas fields in 2024. Despite leading the COP28 agreement to phase out fossil fuels, the UAE leads the world in approving new oil and gas expansion since December 2023 – including one project set to operate until 2100, half a century past the global 2050 phase-out deadline. Brazil, which under President Lula has called on countries to do more to fight climate change, ranks third for 2024.
- While the Troika’s expansion plans raise concerns, Global North countries remain the biggest expanders of oil and gas in the long-run. Previous Oil Change International research shows just five Global North countries – the U.S., Canada, Australia, Norway, and the United Kingdom – are on track to be responsible for around 50% of carbon pollution from new oil and gas fields and fracking wells through to 2050.
A Troubling Disparity Between Commitments and Actions
At COP28, all countries pledged to transition away from fossil fuels in a just, equitable, and orderly manner. The COP Troika have also publicly committed to submitting 1.5°C-aligned climate plans (NDCs) ahead of COP29 next month. However, these nations’ expansion plans contradict the urgent need to halt new fossil fuel developments. To limit warming to the 1.5°C threshold established by the Paris Agreement, all countries must immediately end the approval of new coal, oil, and gas projects, and entrench this commitment in their NDCs due in early 2025.
Global North Countries Must Lead the Phaseout of Fossil Fuels But Expansion Needs to End Everywhere
While the Troika’s expansion plans raise concerns, Global North countries remain the biggest expanders of oil and gas. Previous Oil Change International research shows just five Global North countries – the U.S., Canada, Australia, Norway, and the United Kingdom – are on track to be responsible for around half of the carbon pollution from new oil and gas fields and fracking wells through to 2050. These countries must immediately end oil, gas, and coal expansion, phase out existing production rapidly, and provide grant and grant-equivalent finance to Global South nations to enable a just energy transition. Without immediate action from these rich oil and gas producers, achieving a fair and equitable global phaseout of fossil fuels will meet a deadlock.
While Global North producing countries have a responsibility to lead the phaseout of fossil fuels, the science to avoid breaching 1.5°C is clear: the hard limits of the world’s remaining carbon budget mean that fossil fuel expansion must stop everywhere, including in the countries forming the so-called COP Troika.
Strong New Climate Finance Target Needed at COP29
The upcoming UN climate talks in Baku will be critical to ensure countries make the next key step in implementing the COP28 decision on fossil fuels – funding a fair phaseout. Climate experts have said the success of COP29 depends on nations agreeing to a new climate finance target (NCQG) of at least $1 trillion every year, which must include a subgoal of at least $300 billion annually for mitigation finance. This will allow countries to adopt national climate plans in 2025 that immediately end oil, gas, and coal expansion. Grant-based and highly concessional financing, not more debt-inducing loans, is an urgent need to fulfill the landmark COP28 decision to phase-out fossil fuels, especially for adaptation, loss and damage, and key mitigation projects in the Global South. Rich countries have the means to mobilize well over $5 trillion a year for climate action at home and for the NCQG, including by ending fossil fuel handouts, making big polluters pay, and changing unfair global financial rules.
Azerbaijan, as COP29 president, must guide the success of these negotiations in securing a strong NCQG. As the countries steering the current COP process, the Troika has a unique responsibility to set ambitious global climate targets, and set the precedent for truly 1.5°C-aligned national climate plans. The Troika countries have a clear choice to make. Halting new fossil fuel projects would begin to align COP Troika nations with 1.5°C goals, while ignoring expansion in NDCs would betray climate commitments.
Shady Khalil, Global Policy Senior Strategist at Oil Change International, said:
“The COP Troika was created to generate collaboration and ambition in support of the 1.5°C temperature limit, and the science is indisputable: there is no room for fossil fuel expansion if we are to meet this goal. By pushing forward with massive new fossil fuel projects, the Troika risks undermining the goal they are supposed to be the guardians of and set a terrible example for other countries currently working on their NDCs. While the Global North must lead by phasing out first and providing the financial support other countries need to implement a just transition, the Troika’s contradictory actions threaten to erode global trust and weaken climate efforts. They stand at a crossroads – either honor the science and lead a true and fair fossil fuel phaseout, or continue down a path that endangers a livable future and jeopardizes their legacy. The only way to ensure NDCs are 1.5°C-compatible is to halt new fossil fuel expansion everywhere.”
Shereen Talaat Founder and Director at MENA FEM Movement, said:
“The expansion of fossil fuel production by the Troika countries is a major obstacle to achieving the 1.5°C climate goal. Given the historical responsibility of the Global North on the crisis, it’s imperative that these nations not only need to halt new projects but also develop clear plans to phase out existing production in a just and equitable manner. This crisis demands immediate action, and the Troika countries must lead the way in accelerating the transition to renewable energy; they can demonstrate their commitment to a sustainable future and inspire other nations to follow suit. However, if they continue to expand their oil and gas production, they risk undermining their own credibility and jeopardizing the future of our planet.”
Claudio Angelo, head of International Policy at Observatório do Clima, said:
“Each of the world’s major fossil fuel producers is gambling on being the last seller of oil and gas. This is a Russian roulette that will either roast the planet or result in massive stranded assets. And while it is obvious that planet-wreckers like the United States, Norway, Canada, and Australia must be the first to phase out, Troika countries must live up to their own said commitment to 1.5°C and stop expansion now. The Troika is supposed to lead by example, but looking at their massive fossil expansion plans, it becomes clear that the only example they are setting is how to greenwash oneself away from climate action.”
Ilan Zugman, Latin America Director at 350.org, said:
“Fossil fuels do not equate to development, nor can they meet the ambition required for the 1.5°C threshold. The Brazilian and other Troika governments must confront this misconception. For Brazil to lead the global energy transition, its updated NDC must commit to ending new fossil fuel projects and provide a plan to phase out existing ones. It should also allocate resources to triple global renewable energy capacity. To advance energy justice, Brazil must ensure solar power reaches vulnerable communities. As COP30 host and a G20 leader, Brazil is in a prime position to set this precedent.”
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029LATEST NEWS
Experts Sound Alarm Over Trump's Promise to Let RFK Jr. 'Control' Health Agencies
"RFK Jr. is an anti-vaxxer and conspiracy theorist," said one scientist. "A Trump win will be an absolute catastrophe for public health."
Oct 30, 2024
Public health experts reacted with alarm Wednesday to reports that former President Donald Trump promised anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. control over federal agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Agriculture should the Republican nominee defeat Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris in next week's election.
Speaking at last week's bigotry-laden campaign rally at Madison Square Garden in New York, Trump said that if he wins, he'll let Kennedy—who in August suspended his Independent presidential campaign and endorsed the GOP nominee—"go wild on health."
"I'm gonna let him go wild on the foods," Trump vowed. "I'm gonna let him go wild on the medicines."
In a video posted Tuesday on social media, Kennedy said that the GOP nominee promised him control of the Health and Human Services Department, Department of Agriculture, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health, "and a few others."
Kennedy said control of these agencies "is key to making America healthy, because we've got to get off of seed oils, and we've got to get off of pesticide-intensive agriculture."
Despite his stated interest in tackling major public health issues including government corruption and Big Pharma greed, experts warned that, as Columbia University molecular biologist Lucky Tran
said earlier this week: "RFK Jr is an anti-vaxxer and conspiracy theorist. A Trump win will be an absolute catastrophe for public health."
Kennedy is arguably the world's leading proponent of anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, including that vaccines cause autism. He has mixed spurious disparagement of the safety and efficacy of vaccines, including for Covid-19, with attacks on the well-documented deadly greed of the pharmaceutical industry.
There is some ideological overlap between Trump and Kennedy—who, like the ex-president is a former Democrat—including the shared belief in defunding federal public health agencies, purging their ranks, and investigating and possibly prosecuting some of their employees.
"If you work for the FDA and are part of this corrupt system, I have two messages for you: 1. Preserve your records, and 2. Pack your bags," Kennedy recently
wrote on social media.
Keep ReadingShow Less
16 AGs Push Congress to Pass Federal Ban on Price Gouging
"During and after a crisis, it is unfair—and harmful to our economy—for companies to reap higher profits for selling goods and services that families need to survive."
Oct 30, 2024
The attorneys general of 15 states and the District of Columbia on Wednesday wrote to the top Democrats and Republicans in Congress to advocate for a federal prohibition on price gouging.
"Businesses should never be able to hike prices during an emergency just to increase their profits," said New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the letter. "When companies take advantage of major disruptions and raise prices of food and supplies that New Yorkers rely on, my office holds them accountable, getting people their money back and protecting their wallets."
"Our federal government should have the same power to protect Americans when disaster strikes and stop price gouging at the national level that threatens both hardworking families and small businesses," asserted James, a Democrat.
The letter points out that "over 40 states across the country make price gouging unlawful, reflecting the widespread national consensus that exists, across ideological and regional differences, that in the immediate run-up to and aftermath of a crisis, it is unfair—and harmful to our economy long-term—to reap higher profits for selling goods and services people need to survive."
"As crises, whether natural or human in origin, become more common... now is the time to work constructively in a bipartisan fashion to create federal price gouging protections."
"Despite that consensus, there is currently no federal price gouging prohibition—and individual states face heightened challenges when protecting consumers from price gouging when so many product supply chains are nationwide," it continues. "A federal price gouging prohibition would provide critical partnership to state enforcement and protect consumers and small businesses alike."
The letter—addressed to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) as well as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)—lays out how price gouging bans address market failures and strengthen the economy, explaining that "they act like 'circuit breakers' in a stock market: They put a pause on panic-driven price changes and give everyone a chance to make sure they are making the right pricing choices for the long-term."
Price gouging prohibitions also "prevent inefficient pricing overreactions in the heat of a crisis" and "help to prevent hoarding," the letter adds. Further, they "can restrain inefficiently high prices for products where there is very little competition."
"A federal price gouging prohibition that complemented state prohibitions would allow federal enforcement agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, to identify and restrain unjustified and irrational price increases throughout the entire supply chain, unconstrained by the complications of state-by-state enforcement," the attorneys general wrote. "Such a prohibition should not preempt state laws, but complement and strengthen them by focusing federal enforcement on price gouging that cannot practicably be stopped by a single state."
"Our states provide many different models for how such a price gouging statute might be framed," the coalition noted. "But as crises, whether natural or human in origin, become more common and the cost of living continues to be too high for working families, we believe now is the time to work constructively in a bipartisan fashion to create federal price gouging protections to complement price gouging protections that already exist in almost every state."
In addition to the D.C. attorney general, James was joined by the AGs in Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.
"During and after a crisis, it is unfair—and harmful to our economy—for companies to reap higher profits for selling goods and services that families need to survive," said California Attorney General Rob Bonta. "That is why California's price gouging law protects Californians during and after wildfires, severe weather storms, and other emergencies."
"A federal price gouging prohibition that complements state law would build on successful partnerships between states and the federal government to protect consumers by making it easier to enforce price gouging prohibitions nationally, up the supply chain," the Democrat added. "This would benefit California consumers and small businesses who currently bear the brunt of their suppliers' price setting."
The letter comes amid a fossil fuel-driven climate emergency featuring extreme weather that is increasingly impacting U.S. communities and less than a week away from Election Day, when Americans will choose the next Congress and President. In the race for the White House, former Republican President Donald Trump faces Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris. In August, the Democrat proposed a federal ban on price gouging by food supplies and grocery stores.
"I still remember our mother sitting at that yellow formica table late at night, cup of tea in hand, a pile of bills in front of her, trying to make it all work. And I've heard from so many of you who are facing even greater financial pressures," Harris said in a Tuesday campaign speech. "I will enact the first-ever federal ban on price gouging on groceries, cap the price of insulin, and limit out-of-pocket prescription costs for all Americans. I will fight to make sure that hardworking Americans can actually afford a place to live."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Low-Wage Workers Endorse Slate of Candidates to Win Fairer Economy
One Fair Wage Action is endorsing 25 national and state candidates who are "committed to raising the minimum wage and ending the federal subminimum wage of just $2.13 an hour."
Oct 30, 2024
A U.S. advocacy group fighting for a living wage for its hundreds of thousands of service industry employee members on Wednesday announced its endorsement of a slate of "pro-worker candidates" in next week's elections.
One Fair Wage (OFW) Action—whose members include more than 300,000 U.S. restaurant workers, owners, and other service industry employees—said following its recent endorsement of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris that "these candidates—from Arizona to Michigan to New York—are committed to raising the minimum wage and ending the federal subminimum wage of just $2.13 an hour, a poverty-level wage that leaves tipped and service workers struggling in one of the nation's fastest-growing, yet lowest-paid sectors."
"These candidates understand the need to challenge corporate interests that have long held back meaningful wage reform."
"As families across the nation struggle with rising costs, One Fair Wage Action's coalition of over 300,000 service workers, employers, and allies are mobilizing to amplify the call for living wages," the group continued. "In key battleground states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, the organization will focus on reaching voters who are demanding economic justice and solutions to the cost-of-living crisis."
OFW Action endorsed Democratic candidates including:
- Arizona: Ruben Gallego (U.S. Senate); Junelle Cavero and Oscar De Los Santos (U.S. House); and Mariana Sandoval (state Legislature);
- California: Rose Penelope Yee, Lateefah Simon, Laura Friedman, Rudy Salas, Jimmy Gomez, David Kim, and Stephen Houlahan (U.S. House);
- Illinois: Nikki Budzinski and Lauren Underwood (U.S. House);
- Massachusetts: Leigh Davis and Natalie Higgins (state Legislature);
- Michigan: Elissa Slotkin (U.S. Senate) and Carl Marlinga (U.S. House);
- Nevada: Steven Horsford (U.S. House);
- New York: Adriano Espaillat, John Avlon, Rob Lubin, Grace Meng, Andrea Morse, and John Mannion (U.S. House); and
- Wisconsin: Rebecca Cooke (U.S. House).
"These candidates understand the need to challenge corporate interests that have long held back meaningful wage reform," OFW Action president Saru Jayaraman said Wednesday "For years, powerful lobbying groups have fought to preserve the subminimum wage for tipped workers at just $2.13 an hour, forcing millions of tipped and service workers, who are overwhelmingly women and people of color, to suffer from the highest rates of economic instability and sexual harassment of any industry."
"These candidates are committed to putting a stop to this practice and ensuring that every worker is paid fairly and with dignity," she asserted. "By electing leaders who prioritize fair wages over corporate profits, we can finally create an economy that values the contributions of all workers—not just those at the top."
Last month, OFW applauded Harris for backing an end to the subminimum wage for tipped workers, arguing the policy stands in stark contrast with the platform of former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, whose scheme to end taxes on tipped employees has been panned by experts as potentially harmful to the workers it purports to help.
"For too long, well-funded interests have blocked progress on fair wages," Jayaraman added. "These candidates bring a commitment to meaningful change from within the system. They understand the urgent need to address the imbalance that keeps so many workers struggling to make ends meet. One Fair Wage Action is mobilizing to ensure that these voices are heard, so that workers themselves drive this change at the polls."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular