

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A tanker carrying shale gas from Houston, Texas arrives in North Queensferry, Scotland on March 19, 2020. (Photo: Ken Jack/Getty Images)
Progressives have been urging governments to embark on an accelerated global clean energy transition since Russia's late-February invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing Western sanctions unleashed chaos in energy markets around the world, but policymakers have opted instead to expand fossil fuel infrastructure.
That's according to researchers from Climate Action Tracker, which released a new report Wednesday warning that this reaction threatens to lock in decades of heat-trapping emissions at a time when the window to slash greenhouse gas pollution and avert the most catastrophic effects of the climate crisis is rapidly closing.
"So far, governments have largely failed to seize their chance to rearrange their energy supplies away from fossil fuels," states the report. "Instead, we are witnessing a global 'gold rush' for new fossil gas production, pipelines, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities. This risks locking us into another high-carbon decade and keeping the Paris agreement's 1.5degC limit out of reach."
Key findings of the analysis include:
"If all these plans materialize," the report warns, "they will either end up as massive stranded assets or they'll lock the world into irreversible warming."
Related Content

Climate Action Tracker shared a graphic detailing what governments should and shouldn't do in response to the global energy crisis.
The recommended measures include halting the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure; discouraging domestic fossil fuel production; ramping up renewable energy supplies, including by reinvesting revenue raised through taxes on Big Oil's windfall profits; eliminating fossil fuel subsidies and raising the price of carbon once oil and gas prices fall; and incentivizing energy efficiency and electrification.
A handful of governments, including the E.U. and the U.K., have proposed increasing their renewable energy targets, but these plans remain inadequate, the report says.
"Almost no government supports behavioral change," the report laments. "Immediate and low-cost options to reduce energy demand and therefore the need for Russian fossil fuels would include shifts in behavior, such as encouraging slower driving by introducing/lowering speed limits, home office policies, restricting car access to cities, or turning down the heating in buildings."
"These options still seem to be very unattractive to governments," the authors note. "We have only found governments recommending their population to those behavioral shifts and few incentivizing it. So far only New Zealand, [the] U.S. (California), Italy, Germany, and Ireland have introduced new incentives for public transport."
In addition, "more emphasis on energy efficiency and electrification [is] needed," says the report. "We find only a few countries putting additional emphasis on energy efficiency and/or electrification as a reaction to the current crisis. A push for heat pumps, electric cars, [and] electrification in industry would be an adequate reaction, but is currently underdeveloped."
Responding to the war in Ukraine by boosting the extraction and international shipment of fossil fuels rather than replacing Russian oil and gas supplies with green energy would represent a second missed opportunity since 2020 to take decisive climate action while there's still time to secure a livable future.
"After failing to focus on climate during Covid-19 recovery, many governments look set to make the same mistake in the face of a global energy shock," says the report. "Governments largely failed to make decarbonization a focus in their post-pandemic economic recovery packages, with only a small fraction of the billions spent dedicated to accelerating the energy transition to bring down emissions."
"Instead, they missed a massive opportunity, spending the lion's share of those packages on maintaining the status quo," the report adds. "According to our analysis, governments are making the same mistake, twice over."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Progressives have been urging governments to embark on an accelerated global clean energy transition since Russia's late-February invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing Western sanctions unleashed chaos in energy markets around the world, but policymakers have opted instead to expand fossil fuel infrastructure.
That's according to researchers from Climate Action Tracker, which released a new report Wednesday warning that this reaction threatens to lock in decades of heat-trapping emissions at a time when the window to slash greenhouse gas pollution and avert the most catastrophic effects of the climate crisis is rapidly closing.
"So far, governments have largely failed to seize their chance to rearrange their energy supplies away from fossil fuels," states the report. "Instead, we are witnessing a global 'gold rush' for new fossil gas production, pipelines, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities. This risks locking us into another high-carbon decade and keeping the Paris agreement's 1.5degC limit out of reach."
Key findings of the analysis include:
"If all these plans materialize," the report warns, "they will either end up as massive stranded assets or they'll lock the world into irreversible warming."
Related Content

Climate Action Tracker shared a graphic detailing what governments should and shouldn't do in response to the global energy crisis.
The recommended measures include halting the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure; discouraging domestic fossil fuel production; ramping up renewable energy supplies, including by reinvesting revenue raised through taxes on Big Oil's windfall profits; eliminating fossil fuel subsidies and raising the price of carbon once oil and gas prices fall; and incentivizing energy efficiency and electrification.
A handful of governments, including the E.U. and the U.K., have proposed increasing their renewable energy targets, but these plans remain inadequate, the report says.
"Almost no government supports behavioral change," the report laments. "Immediate and low-cost options to reduce energy demand and therefore the need for Russian fossil fuels would include shifts in behavior, such as encouraging slower driving by introducing/lowering speed limits, home office policies, restricting car access to cities, or turning down the heating in buildings."
"These options still seem to be very unattractive to governments," the authors note. "We have only found governments recommending their population to those behavioral shifts and few incentivizing it. So far only New Zealand, [the] U.S. (California), Italy, Germany, and Ireland have introduced new incentives for public transport."
In addition, "more emphasis on energy efficiency and electrification [is] needed," says the report. "We find only a few countries putting additional emphasis on energy efficiency and/or electrification as a reaction to the current crisis. A push for heat pumps, electric cars, [and] electrification in industry would be an adequate reaction, but is currently underdeveloped."
Responding to the war in Ukraine by boosting the extraction and international shipment of fossil fuels rather than replacing Russian oil and gas supplies with green energy would represent a second missed opportunity since 2020 to take decisive climate action while there's still time to secure a livable future.
"After failing to focus on climate during Covid-19 recovery, many governments look set to make the same mistake in the face of a global energy shock," says the report. "Governments largely failed to make decarbonization a focus in their post-pandemic economic recovery packages, with only a small fraction of the billions spent dedicated to accelerating the energy transition to bring down emissions."
"Instead, they missed a massive opportunity, spending the lion's share of those packages on maintaining the status quo," the report adds. "According to our analysis, governments are making the same mistake, twice over."
Progressives have been urging governments to embark on an accelerated global clean energy transition since Russia's late-February invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing Western sanctions unleashed chaos in energy markets around the world, but policymakers have opted instead to expand fossil fuel infrastructure.
That's according to researchers from Climate Action Tracker, which released a new report Wednesday warning that this reaction threatens to lock in decades of heat-trapping emissions at a time when the window to slash greenhouse gas pollution and avert the most catastrophic effects of the climate crisis is rapidly closing.
"So far, governments have largely failed to seize their chance to rearrange their energy supplies away from fossil fuels," states the report. "Instead, we are witnessing a global 'gold rush' for new fossil gas production, pipelines, and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities. This risks locking us into another high-carbon decade and keeping the Paris agreement's 1.5degC limit out of reach."
Key findings of the analysis include:
"If all these plans materialize," the report warns, "they will either end up as massive stranded assets or they'll lock the world into irreversible warming."
Related Content

Climate Action Tracker shared a graphic detailing what governments should and shouldn't do in response to the global energy crisis.
The recommended measures include halting the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure; discouraging domestic fossil fuel production; ramping up renewable energy supplies, including by reinvesting revenue raised through taxes on Big Oil's windfall profits; eliminating fossil fuel subsidies and raising the price of carbon once oil and gas prices fall; and incentivizing energy efficiency and electrification.
A handful of governments, including the E.U. and the U.K., have proposed increasing their renewable energy targets, but these plans remain inadequate, the report says.
"Almost no government supports behavioral change," the report laments. "Immediate and low-cost options to reduce energy demand and therefore the need for Russian fossil fuels would include shifts in behavior, such as encouraging slower driving by introducing/lowering speed limits, home office policies, restricting car access to cities, or turning down the heating in buildings."
"These options still seem to be very unattractive to governments," the authors note. "We have only found governments recommending their population to those behavioral shifts and few incentivizing it. So far only New Zealand, [the] U.S. (California), Italy, Germany, and Ireland have introduced new incentives for public transport."
In addition, "more emphasis on energy efficiency and electrification [is] needed," says the report. "We find only a few countries putting additional emphasis on energy efficiency and/or electrification as a reaction to the current crisis. A push for heat pumps, electric cars, [and] electrification in industry would be an adequate reaction, but is currently underdeveloped."
Responding to the war in Ukraine by boosting the extraction and international shipment of fossil fuels rather than replacing Russian oil and gas supplies with green energy would represent a second missed opportunity since 2020 to take decisive climate action while there's still time to secure a livable future.
"After failing to focus on climate during Covid-19 recovery, many governments look set to make the same mistake in the face of a global energy shock," says the report. "Governments largely failed to make decarbonization a focus in their post-pandemic economic recovery packages, with only a small fraction of the billions spent dedicated to accelerating the energy transition to bring down emissions."
"Instead, they missed a massive opportunity, spending the lion's share of those packages on maintaining the status quo," the report adds. "According to our analysis, governments are making the same mistake, twice over."