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.
Keir Starmer has inherited a controversial decision from Boris Johnson’s government. The UK Prime Minister must decide whether USD $1.5 billion of UK taxpayer support should be used to enable one of the most controversial infrastructure projects of modern times: The Mozambique Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Project.
Oil Change International provided input to support the U.N. Special Rapporteur in assessing the impact of public finance within the current international legal framework governing the fossil fuel-based economy.
The first in-depth analysis on the escalating wave of climate litigation aimed at fossil fuel companies reveals 86 climate lawsuits have been filed against the world’s largest oil, gas, and coal producing corporations – including BP, Chevron, Eni, ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies. The number of cases filed against fossil fuel companies each year has nearly tripled since the Paris Agreement was reached in 2015, highlighting a growing global movement to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in the climate crisis.
Japan is promoting a dirty energy strategy across Asia that prioritizes fossil fuel production, putting corporate profits ahead of the people and the planet. This series of leaflets provides a wider audience with easy-to-understand information about Japan and its dangerous distractions.
The Big Oil Reality Check report finds that the climate pledges and plans of 8 international oil and gas companies fail to align with international agreements to phase out fossil fuels and to limit global temperature rise to 1.5ºC.
This briefing assesses Shell’s fossil fuel extraction plans in light of Shell's appeal of a Dutch court verdict requiring the company to take responsibility for its climate pollution. Our analysis shows that Shell continues to plan for levels of oil and gas production and investment that undermine the world’s chances of curtailing climate disaster.
Oil and gas companies, and some governments, are more interested in looking like they're acting on climate change than actually acting. They spend billions on smoke and mirrors such as “carbon capture and storage,” “certified gas,” ammonia co-firing, and hydrogen when in reality, they are trying to build escape hatches to continue their dirty business as usual.
US non-profit Ceres has produced a paper aimed at explaining actions that oil and gas exploration and production companies (E&Ps) can take to reduce their emissions. It is also supposed to provide useful information on climate alignment to the sector’s investors and bankers. The paper suffers from a number of alarming weaknesses which threaten to reverse progress on setting standards for net-zero finance. Consequently, Reclaim Finance, Oil Change International, urgewald, CIEL, and Stand.Earth have jointly published this analysis in response.
These briefings reveal that Total, Eni, and Equinor are on the cusp of approving a surge of new oil and gas development. If they proceed with all the projects in their anticipated pipeline for 2023, Eni could rank as the world’s third worst oil and gas expander this year and Equinor as the world’s eighth worst by the total volume of new reserves approved for extraction.
The briefing reveals that new oil and gas production approved to date in 2022 and at risk of approval over the next three years could cumulatively lock in 70 billion tonnes (Gt) of new carbon pollution. This is equivalent to almost two years’ worth of global carbon emissions from energy at current levels, 17 percent of the world’s remaining 1.5°C carbon budget, or the lifecycle emissions of 468 coal power plants.
