International Energy Agency Declares the End of Fossil Fuels (finally)
Get Ready for the Rise of Clean Energy
Welcome to the web version of
Need to Know: Science & Insight
, a new form of personal journalism that looks at what we
Need-to-Know
at this time of pandemic, existential crisis of climate change and unravelling of nature’s life supports.
Learn more.
The era of fossil fuel use is ending and any new investment is a waste of money and puts our future in serious jeopardy.
That’s the new conclusion from the International Energy Agency (IEA) one of the most conservative of global institutions. (There are those who would have said the IEA doesn’t just work for governments but for the fossil fuel industry itself.)
The IEA is considered the gold standard by governments for reports on energy use, production and future trends. In what is their most important report in 50 years, the IEA charts a cost-effective and socially acceptable pathway to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5 °C.
A few things that need to happen on the pathway to 1.5C:
Starting today there should no investment in any new fossil fuel supply projects.
Nor any additional investment in new coal plants without carbon capture and storage.
No sales of gasoline and diesel passenger vehicles by 2035
Today 80 percent of the global energy system is powered by fossil fuels but must be entirely carbon-free by 2040
Annual installation of new solar and wind needs to be 400 percent greater by 2030
To sum up: the IEA says fossil fuel use must decline rapidly and that 80 percent renewable energy will take over.
The IEA hasn’t changed its spots; it’s still a very conservative institution. Its pathway might be radical for them but it is not a radical plan of climate action. A previous Need to Know issue looked at energy experts whose studies show 100% renewable energy was possible globally by 2030.
While the IEA pathway to 1.5C isn’t radical or extreme, it is very risky. It’s risky because to get to net zero carbon by 2050, their plan relies on massive deployment of unproven and expensive carbon-removing technology after 2040.
For an institution focused on numbers and data, the IEA is years late in responding to the science. Back in 2014 I wrote a piece based on a study that determined we would soon have built enough fossil fuel using infrastructure to push warming over 2 degrees C.
By 2018 no new fossil fuel using cars, homes, schools, factories, or electrical power plants should be built anywhere in the world, ever again, unless they're either replacements for old ones or carbon neutral.
“We've been hiding what's going on from ourselves: A high-carbon future is being locked in by the world's capital investments,”
— Robert Socolow, study co-author and Princeton University climate scientist
Well it’s 2022 and that high-carbon future is locked in. Power plants will have to be retired early and expensive retrofits will be needed for buildings and the transport sector.
Need-to-Know 1: The transition to net zero carbon will be much more costly than it could have been.
Need-to-Know 2: The slower the transition to net zero carbon the more costly and more risky it becomes.
The IEA deserves some of the blame after decades of saying fossil fuel use would always increase. And now they are also apparently aware that countries and corporations don’t do what they promise when it comes to cutting emissions.
Here’s what Fatih Birol, the IEA Executive Director said in a press conference on Tuesday:
“There is a growing gap between what leaders say and what they do.”
Because there is so much climate BS flying around the IEA pathway has specific targets and dates. These milestones are there to make it easier for anyone to compare what needs to happen with government and corporate actions.
Need-to-Know 3: It’s up to the public to hold government and corporate feet to the fire to make sure they act.
Remember the IEA’s pathway isn’t radical and more will need to be done, and done sooner.
From last week’s Need to Know: New Rules for our Climate Emergency:
Need-to-Know 3: If a government and corporate announcement or decision does not really cut carbon NOW then we are failing to treat the climate crisis like the emergency it is.
Holding governments and companies accountable requires us to be aware of their subtle manipulation of blame and propaganda we’ve been exposed to over the years. Last week’s Need to Know detailed some of these and now there are studies looking at how predatory delay is the new climate denial.
“We are all to blame for climate change.”
— Both fossil fuel industry and governments use this while blocking or failing to provide us with actual alternatives. But sure blame the victims
Need-to-Know 4: predatory delay is the new climate denial.
Oil giant Exxon and the industry generally started blaming the climate crisis on consumers two decades ago according to a new analysis of advertising as well as other external and internal communications.
The intent was to place both the blame and the responsibility for solving the climate problem on individuals. For example, oil giant BP coined the term "carbon footprint" in 2004.
Exxon used words and phrases such as "risk" as in ‘the risk of climate change’ when speaking to governments and the public about climate rather than "reality."
"They talk about energy demand, they talk about need, they talk about use, and they use the term 'consumers,'" said co-author Naomi Oreskes, a researcher at Harvard University.
It is all about of shifting responsibility away from the producers of oil like ExxonMobil and putting it onto the public Oreskes said.
Need-to-Know 5: Fossil fuel industry and their supporters have, and will continue to blame you and me for climate change.
These efforts to deflect the blame on to the public mimics tobacco industry propaganda which knowingly sold a deadly product while denying its harms.
Need-to-Know 6: 100 active fossil fuel producers including ExxonMobil, Shell, BHP Billiton and Gazprom are linked to 71% of industrial greenhouse gas emissions since 1988
Now companies are positioning themselves as “fossil fuel saviours”. They are who we should trust to address the climate crisis we brought on ourselves because we need energy the study concluded.
Shell CEO: “You need our help on climate change” — meanwhile continuing to fund anti-climate lobbying
Nearly all of those 100 fossil fuel producers say they support the Paris climate agreement. However this year’s carbon emissions are expected to be the second largest increase ever according to the IEA. And they are worried, like the rest of us, that governments are not doing nearly enough to green the post Covid economy.
Three days after the IEA 1.5C report was released environment ministers from G7 countries promised to would align their policies with the 1.5C pathway and fully decarbonize their energy sectors by 2030. (Yes, they said as much in 2015 in Paris.) In any case, good news? Maybe. G7 finance ministers have yet to agree. Nor have country leaders agreed yet.
Turning these promises into action requires putting more ambitious domestic policies in place this year, not next or 2025. And it also means helping developing countries make the transition away from fossil fuels.
Need-to-Know 7: We’re all in this together.
Until next time, please stay strong and stay safe.
Stephen