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 idea that greater pipeline capacity and access to tidewater would maximize the value Alberta receives for its tar sands crude is a standard talking point for industry, politicians, and other commentators in the ongoing oil price-induced recession in Alberta.
New analysis released today at the COP21 climate negotiations reveals that G7 countries along with Australia spend 40 times more on support for fossil fuel production than they do in contributions to the Green Climate Fund.
Oil Change International joins hundreds of organizations worldwide that have written to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) board calling on global reporting standards for extractive industries to include transparency from fossil fuel companies about the future viability of their oil, coal and gas projects in a warming world.
With Shell in the Arctic, the scale and volume of the blowback from the environmental community has clearly caught the Administration flat footed. When confronted, they usually first mumble something about highest standards (which is completely irrelevant to the climate argument) but if pressed, the Administration and its defenders invoke a sober, scolding tone to explain: 1) We need oil and we will need oil for a long time. While we’re all concerned about climate, we’re still going to need oil and gas in the future and we might as well make as much of it as possible right here at home. 2) U.S. oil production is essentially irrelevant for climate, because “more oil production in one place generally means less oil production elsewhere – that’s how markets and prices work”. Together, these two arguments form what we can think of as the Convenient Lie that we can be serious about fighting climate change and also approve virtually all new fossil fuel infrastructure in the U.S. It’s the Convenient Lie that keeps us from dealing with the Inconvenient Truth.
Public support for fossil fuel exploration in rich countries is nearly triple the amount pledged to the Green Climate Fund.
Today, Oil Change International and the Sierra Club released a report finding that none of the major multilateral development banks are succeeding in reaching the world’s poor with their energy projects.
A new report by Oil Change International identifies billions of dollars in subsidies for fossil fuel exploration from the world’s wealthiest countries.
A new report by Oil Change International, Cashing in on All of the Above: U.S. Fossil Fuel Production Subsidies under Obama, demonstrates the huge and growing amount of subsidies going to the fossil fuel industry in the U.S. every year. In 2013, the U.S. federal and state governments gave away $21.6 billion in subsidies for oil, gas, and coal exploration and production.
In 2009, President Obama made a commitment to reduce U.S. greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020. The Obama administration put this forward as the U.S. share of a global effort to limit climate change to no more than two degrees Celsius – the target scientists tell us may be safe. Achieving this target, which has been unanimously agreed on a global level, is central to the success of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, announced in June of last year.
Refineries that may be supplied by Keystone XL continue to increase exports. Gulf Coast refined product exports have grown 172% since 2008.
