November, 25 2015, 01:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Stefano Ambrogi,sambrogi@carbontracker.org,+44 7557 916940,David Mason,david.mason@greenhousepr.co.uk,+44 7799 072320
Fossil fuel firms risk wasting $2 trillion on uneconomic projects
Governments and companies must align plans with the energy transition underway to deliver a low-carbon future
LONDON / NEW YORK
Fossil fuel companies risk wasting up to $2.2 trillion in the next decade, threatening substantially lower investor returns, by pursuing projects that could be uneconomic in the face of a perfect storm of factors including international action to limit climate change to 2@C and rapid advances in clean technologies, think tank the Carbon Tracker Initiative warns today.
No new coal mines will be needed, oil demand will peak around 2020, and growth in gas will disappoint industry expectations, it finds in a new report highlighting the danger zone between industry business-as-usual strategies and action that would be needed to meet the UN commitment to limit climate change to 2@C.
The $2 trillion stranded assets danger zone: How fossil fuel firms risk destroying investor returns, maps out coal, oil and gas supply that makes neither financial nor climate sense in a 2@C world and how this affects both listed and public companies. The report warns: "If the industry misreads future demand by underestimating technology and policy advances, this can lead to an excess of supply and create stranded assets. This is where shareholders should be concerned - if companies are committing to future production which may never generate the returns expected."
James Leaton, head of research and co-author of the report, said: "Too few energy companies recognise that they will need to reduce supply of their carbon-intensive products to avoid pushing us beyond the internationally recognised carbon budget. Clean technology and climate policy are already reducing fossil fuel demand - misreading these trends will destroy shareholder value. Companies need to apply 2@C stress tests to their business models now."
The US has the greatest financial exposure with $412 billion of unneeded fossil fuel projects to 2025 at risk of becoming stranded assets, followed by Canada ($220bln), China ($179bln), Russia ($147bln) and Australia ($103bln).
The companies that represent the biggest risk in a demand misread to the climate and shareholders alike in the next decade are a mix of state and listed companies, including oil majors Royal Dutch Shell, Pemex, Exxon Mobil, and coal miners Peabody, Coal India, and Glencore. Around 20-25% of oil and gas majors' potential investment is on projects that will not be needed in a 2@C scenario, and cancelling them would mean going ex-growth.
The report looks at production to 2035 and capital investment to 2025. It warns that energy companies must avoid projects that would generate 156 billion tons of carbon dioxide (156Gt CO2), in order to be consistent with the carbon budget in the International Energy Agency's 450 demand scenario, which sets out an energy pathway with a 50% chance of meeting the UN 20C climate change target.
Mark Fulton, advisor to Carbon Tracker, former head of research at Deutsche Bank Climate Change Advisors, and co-author of the report, said: "Our work shows thermal coal has the most significant overhang of unneeded supply in terms of carbon of all fossil fuels on any scenario. No new mines are needed globally in a 2@C world."
Carbon Tracker warned last month that big energy companies are ignoring rapid advances in clean technologies which threaten to undermine their business models, such as renewables, battery storage and electric cars, in a report[1] challenging nine business as usual assumptions made by the industry to argue that coal, oil and gas will all continue to grow in the next decades.
Anthony Hobley, CEO of Carbon Tracker, said: "Business history is littered with examples of incumbents[2] who fail to see the transition coming. Fossil fuel incumbents seem intent on wasting capital trying to hold onto growth by doing what they have always done rather than embracing the energy transition and preserving value by adopting an ex-growth strategy. Our report offers these companies both a warning and a strategy for avoiding significant value destruction."
COAL - In a 2@C world, demand can be met from existing mines and no new mines will be needed. "It is the end of the road for expansion of the coal sector," the new report states. Over the next decade, capital expenditure of $177 billion on new projects and $42 billion on existing ones is unneeded.
China, the US, Australia, India and Indonesia have the greatest exposure, accounting for over 90% of unneeded investment. Export markets are in structural decline as China seeks to peak its coal demand and India aims to become more self-sufficient in energy, threatening big exporters like Australia and Indonesia. In the US half of all potential projects from Peabody, Murray and Foresight will be unneeded.
OIL - "In the 450 scenario oil demand peaks around 2020. This means the oil sector does not need to continue to grow, which is inconsistent with the narrative of many companies," the report states. Spending of $1.3 trillion on new projects and $124 billion on existing projects is unneeded. Overall 43% of investment in new projects and 33% of new supply should be avoided to align with a 2@C scenario, avoiding 28Gt of CO2.
The countries with the greatest financial exposure are the US, Canada, Russia, Mexico and Kazakhstan. The biggest risk is from shale oil in the US, oil sands in Canada and conventional oil in Russia. All three, with Norway, are exposed to Arctic oil. Deep water projects in the US and Mexico and Venezuela's heavy oil are also in the danger zone. However, OPEC conventional production faces little risk due to its low cost.
GAS - In a 2C world gas growth will be "at a lower level than expected under a business as usual scenario", the report finds. Capital expenditure of $459 billion on new projects and $73 billion on existing projects is surplus to requirements. Overall 41% of investment in new projects and 25% of new supply, accounting for 9 Gt of CO2, is unneeded.
The US, Australia, Indonesia, Canada and Malaysia have the greatest exposure, accounting for three-quarters of investment risk. Within the markets we analyse (North America, Europe, and the LNG export market), two-thirds of new coal bed methane and Arctic projects are in the danger zone; half of the supply in new LNG projects is unneeded and very little new capacity will be needed in the US and Canada in a 2@C scenario.
CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE - Carbon Tracker's analysis assumes 24Gt of CO2 will be captured by CCS by 2035 in line with the IEA 450 scenario, but it warns that this would require CCS to grow to a level 150 times where it is today. Delays in CCS could significantly increase the reductions in coal that will be needed and the IEA has estimated that a 10-year delay in large-scale CCS deployment from 2020 to 2030 could cost fossil fuel producers $1.35 trillion in lost revenues.
From Wednesday 25th November the report will be available for download at https://www.carbontracker.org/report/stranded-assets-danger-zone/
The Carbon Tracker Initiative is a not-for-profit financial think tank that seeks to promote a climate-secure global energy market by aligning capital markets with climate reality. Our research to date on unburnable carbon and stranded assets has begun a new debate on how to align the financial system with the energy transition to a low carbon future. www.carbontracker.org
LATEST NEWS
'No Way' We Let Trump Privatize Postal Service, Say Progressives
Instead of privatization, said one Democratic lawmaker, "Fire his former pick for postmaster, DeJoy, and let a real professional run it like it should be run. The first priority is delivering mail. Cut the Pentagon's bloat if you want to save money."
Dec 15, 2024
After weekend reporting indicated President-elect Donald Trump is actively thinking about avenues to privatize the U.S. Postal Service, progressives decried any such efforts and once again directed their ire on the much-reviled Postermaster General, appointed to run the USPS during Trump's first term.
Citing people familiar with recent talks within the incoming team's camp, the Washington Postreported Saturday that Trump is "keen" for a privatization scheme that would hand the USPS over to for-profit, private interests.
According to the Post:
Trump has discussed his desire to overhaul the Postal Service at his Mar-a-Lago estate with Howard Lutnick, his pick for commerce secretary and the co-chair of his presidential transition, the people said. Earlier this month, Trump also convened a group of transition officials to ask for their views on privatizing the agency, one of the people said.
Told of the mail agency's annual financial losses, Trump said the government should not subsidize the organization, the people said. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to reflect private conversations.
Trump's hostility to government programs that serve the public interest—including Medicare, Social Security, public education, and consumer protection agencies—is well-documented.
"The United States Postal Service is a crucial asset that was built and is owned by all of us, and there is zero mandate from the public to turn it over to an oligarch."
Trump's attacks on the Postal Service, including his blessing of the 2020 appointment of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, a former logistics industry executive, sparked alarm about Republican desires to gut the agency from the inside out.
While calls to fire DeJoy from the USPS top leadership post persisted during the last year of Trump's first term and remained constant during Biden's time in office, he remains Postmaster General despite repeated accusations that his ultimate aim is to diminish the agency to such an extend that it will be more possible to justify its dismantling.
While the Post's reporting on Saturday stated that Trump's "specific plans for overhauling the Postal Service" in his upcoming term "were not immediately clear," it did quote Casey Mulligan, who served as a top economic advisor during the last administration, who touted the private sectors performance compared to a Postal Service he claimed was too slow and costly.
"We didn't finish the job in the first term, but we should finish it now," said Mulligan.
Progressive defenders of the Postal Service, in response, denounced any future effort to privatize the agency, one of the most popular among the U.S. public.
"The Post Office is in our constitution," said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) on Saturday. "There is no way we let Donald Trump privatize it. Fire his former pick for postmaster, DeJoy, and let a real professional run it like it should be run. The first priority is delivering mail. Cut the Pentagon's bloat if you want to save money."
Former Ohio state senator Nina Turner also defended the USPS, saying that "72% of Americans approve of the U.S. Postal Service, it's how many seniors receive medication, especially in rural areas."
Progressive critics of right-wing attacks on the Postal Service have noted for years that the "financial performance" issues are a direct result of the "burdensome and unnecessary" pre-funding of liabilities mandated by the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, which forces the USPS to pay billions each year towards future postal worker retirement benefits.
"No matter what your partisan stripe," said Micah Rasmussen, director of the The Rebovich Institute for New Jersey Politics at Rider University, "we should be able to agree the United States Postal Service is a crucial asset that was built and is owned by all of us, and there is zero mandate from the public to turn it over to an oligarch."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Holiday Season Ultimatum From Amazon Workers: Bargain or We Strike!
"If Amazon chooses to ignore us, they’re the ones ruining Christmas for millions of families. We’re not just fighting for a contract; we’re fighting for the future of worker power at Amazon and beyond."
Dec 14, 2024
Workers at a Amazon warehouse and delivery center in New York announced approval of strike authorizations on Friday, giving the retail giant—who have refused to negotiate for months—until Sunday to come to the bargaining table or risk a major work stoppage at the height of the holiday shopping season.
The unions representing Amazon workers at two New York City facilities—the JFK8 warehouse on Staten Island and the DBK4 delivery center in Queens—cited the company's "illegal refusal to recognize their union and negotiate a contract" to address low wages and dangerous working conditions as the reason for the strike authorization.
"We just want what everyone else in America wants—to do our jobs and get paid enough to take care of ourselves and our families. And Amazon isn't letting us do that."
"Amazon is pushing its workers closer to the picket line by failing to show them the respect they have earned," said Teamsters General President Sean M. O’Brien in a statement. "We've been clear: Amazon has until December 15 to come to the table and bargain for a contract. If these white-collar criminals want to keep breaking the law, they better get ready for a fight."
The workers are demanding:
- A living wage with fair pay increases.
- Safer working conditions to prevent injuries and fatalities.
- Job security and protection from arbitrary firings.
- Dignity and respect for all employees.
In June, over 5,500 workers at JFK8—who first voted in favor of creating a union in 2022—joined the Teamsters and chartered the Amazon Labor Union (ALU)-IBT Local 1. Despite consolidating their organizing strength with the backing of the Teamsters, Amazon management has dragged their feet on bargaining a first contract, hardly surprising given the company's long-standing hostility to organized labor.
"Amazon's refusal to negotiate is a direct attack on our rights," said Connor Spence, president of ALU-IBT Local 1, on Friday. "If Amazon chooses to ignore us, they’re the ones ruining Christmas for millions of families. We’re not just fighting for a contract; we’re fighting for the future of worker power at Amazon and beyond."
Rank-and-file members said their demands are reasonable, especially as the company—owned by the world's second-richest man, Jeff Bezos—continues to rake in massive profits year after year as one of the world's largest companies.
"We aren't asking for much," said James Saccardo, a worker at JFK8. "We just want what everyone else in America wants—to do our jobs and get paid enough to take care of ourselves and our families. And Amazon isn't letting us do that."
In Queens, where Amazon workers at DBK4—the corporation's largest delivery station in the city—voted nearly unanimously to authorize a strike of their own.
"Driving for Amazon is tough," said Luc Rene, a driver who works out of DBK4. "What's even tougher is fighting a mega-corporation that constantly breaks the law and games the system. But we won't give up."
"Every horror story you read about Amazon is true, but worse," said Justine, a warehouse worker in New York in a video produced by More Perfect Union.
BREAKING: Amazon workers in NYC are going on strike right before Christmas — the company's busiest time.
The first unionized Amazon warehouse is going to shut down in a historic walkout.
Workers plan to hit the company where it hurts to win their first union contract. pic.twitter.com/CwnrRWg4be
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) December 13, 2024
A strike at this time of year, the busiest for the retail giant, reports labor correspondent Jessica Burbank for Drop Site News, "would hit them where it hurts. The scale of the strike would be unprecedented, including the major hubs of New York and San Bernadino, California."
According to Burbank:
Amazon now has a workforce of over 700,000, making it the largest employer of warehouse workers in the nation. If a contract is won at these initial 20 bargaining units, it has the potential to impact working conditions for thousands of workers, and inspire union organizing efforts at Amazon facilities across the country.
For Amazon workers who voted to unionize their warehouses in March of 2022, this has been a long time coming. “Thousands of Amazon workers courageously cast their ballots to form a union at JFK8 in Staten Island,” Smalls said in a text. “We shocked the world, we had won against a corporate giant and hoped that step would propel us forward to help create a better workplace.” For years, Amazon stalled on recognizing the union, and has not yet met union representatives at the negotiating table.
Smalls said, “I’m excited to see workers take control, take the next step and move even further down the path to victory when they exercise their right to strike.” He continued, “We celebrated as we inspired thousands of others to hope for the same.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Saturday issued his support for the union workers.
"Amazon delivery drivers and warehouse workers deserve decent wages, benefits and working conditions—and the right to form a union," said Sanders. "I strongly support the thousands of Amazon workers who will go on strike tomorrow if Amazon doesn't end its illegal union busting."
The workers at JFK8 said people could support the union's effort in various ways "at this critical time," including:
- Donate to the Solidarity Fund: Help workers sustain their fight by contributing to the strike fund.
- Show Up on the Picket Line: Join workers at JFK8 to demonstrate solidarity and hold Amazon accountable for their illegal refusal to negotiate a union contract.
- Spread the Word: Use social media and local networks to raise awareness about the workers’ struggle and the importance of their fight for justice at Amazon.
- Contact Elected Officials: Urge representatives to publicly support JFK8 workers and pressure Amazon to negotiate in good faith.
- Sign the Petition: Stand with Amazon workers and demand that Amazon guarantee a safe return to work, free of harassment and retaliatory disciplinary action, to all workers participating in protected collective action.
For his part, former labor secretary and economist Robert Reich said he had no sympathy for the retail giant's refusal to bargain in good faith with the workers who make its business model possible.
"Amazon had $15 billion in profits last quarter," said Reich. "Don't tell me they can't afford to bargain a fair contract."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Bernie Sanders Says Defeating Oligarchy Now Most Urgent Issue
"My friends, you don’t have to be a PhD in political science to understand that this is not democracy. This is not one person, one vote. This is not all of us coming together to decide our future. This is oligarchy."
Dec 14, 2024
Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is escalating his fight against the U.S. oligarchy with a new campaign directed at the nation's wealthiest individuals—including Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg—who he says are key culprits in a global race to the bottom that is stripping people worldwide of political agency while impoverishing billions so that the rich can amass increasingly obscene levels of wealth.
Announcing a new series that will detail how "billionaire oligarchs" in the U.S. "manipulate the global economy, purchase our elections, avoid paying taxes, and increasingly control our government," Sanders said in a Friday night video address that it makes him laugh when mainstream pundits talk openly about the nefarious oligarchic structures in other places, but refuse to acknowledge the issue in domestic terms.
"Strangely enough, the term 'oligarchy' is very rarely used to describe what's happening in the United States or in fact, what's happening around the world," said Sanders. "But guess what? Oligarchy is a global phenomenon, and it is headquartered right here in the United States."
Bernie Sanders talks about the oligarchy
While rarely discussed in the corporate press or by most elected officials, argues Sanders, the reality is that a "small number of incredibly wealthy billionaires own and control much of the global economy. Period. End of discussion. And increasingly they own and control our government through a corrupt campaign finance system."
Since the the victory of President-elect Donald Trump in November, Sanders has been increasingly outspoken about his frustrations over the failure of the Democratic Party to adequately confront the contradictions presented by a party that purports to represent the interests of the working class yet remains so beholden to corporate interests and the wealthy that lavish it with campaign contributions.
In a missive to supporters last month, Sanders bemoaned how "just 150 billionaire families spent nearly $2 billion to get their candidates elected" in this year's elections, which included giving to both major political parties. Such a reality, he said, must be challenged.
As part of his new effort announced Friday, Sanders' office said the two-time Democratic presidential candidate would be hosting a series of discussions with the leading experts on various topics related to the form and function of U.S. oligarchy and expose the incoming Trump administration's "ties to the billionaire class," including their efforts to further erode democracy, gut regulations, enrich themselves, and undermine the common good.
"In my view," said Sanders, "this issue of oligarchy is the most important issue facing our country and world because it touches on everything else." He said the climate crisis, healthcare, worker protections, and the fight against poverty are all adversely effected by the power of the wealthy elites who control the economy and the political sphere.
"My friends, you don’t have to be a PhD in political science to understand that this is not democracy," he said. "This is not one person, one vote. This is not all of us coming together to decide our future. This is oligarchy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular