Oil Change International publishes upwards of 20 reports and briefings every year focused on supporting the movement for a just phase-out of fossil fuels.
The next president and Congress should reinstate the crude export ban in tandem with policies to ensure a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels. A reimplementation of the ban would therefore require an ambitious and well-funded energy policy to prioritize justice and equity for workers and frontline and Indigenous communities in the necessary transition away from fossil fuels.
The latest climate science and rapidly changing energy markets indicate the need to rapidly shift away from fossil gas, yet the IEA mistakenly presents gas as compatible with a decarbonized future. This policy brief brings together the latest energy market research with the need for reform of the World Energy Outlook.
There is an urgent need to ensure that anti-climate riders stay out of appropriations packages for Fiscal Year 2020 as Congress and the Trump Administration continue to negotiate a spending package.
Over the past decade, nearly 90% of the U.S. Export-Import Bank's total finance for energy projects has flowed to projects in oil, gas, and coal. As momentum grows for climate solutions in the U.S. and abroad, there is an urgent need for a ban on fossil fuel financing at ExIm.
There is no room for further financing of fossil gas or any other fossil fuel projects by the EIB. This briefing calls for the new Energy Lending Policy to reflect this reality. The EIB cannot claim to uphold its commitment to align its finance with the Paris Agreement if it continues to finance fossil gas projects.
To help inform the alignment of the MDBs with the Paris Agreement, this briefing explores the use of shadow carbon pricing by MDBs and considers some best practices and limitations in the application of shadow carbon prices.
The ACP is facing a triple threat of challenges that combine to present serious obstacles for the project to reach completion, which are are likely to further delay construction and raise the project’s price tag even higher. It would be prudent for investors to question whether pursuing the project further is a wise use of capital.
Investors often use the WEO to assess energy investments. Contrary to the IEA’s claims, its ‘Sustainable Development Scenario’ (SDS) is not aligned with the Paris goals.
The twin challenges of air pollution and climate change demand a rapid transition away from fossil fuels, and a particularly rapid phase-out of coal-fired power plants. Despite this, the Korean government continues to be among the biggest backers of coal-fired power plants around the world.
The IEA scenarios — including the Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS) — fall short of the Paris Agreement goals and therefore don’t actually answer the question investors are asking, namely: are companies prepared for a world that takes the Paris Agreement seriously? The SDS is not providing an effective stress test, nor a useful guide to how things may change.
