SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
June, 12 2018, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Alex Doukas, alex@priceofoil.org, +1 202 817 0357
David Turnbull, david@priceofoil.org, +1 202 316 3499
Report: G20 Countries Set to Invest Over $1.6 trillion in 'Fossil Gas,' Jeopardizing Paris Climate Goals
New analysis finds G20 countries are investing heavily in fossil gas in direct contradiction with Paris Agreement goals they have agreed to.
BARILOCHE, ARGENTINA
As G20 energy ministers gather in Argentina, a new report out today entitled 'Debunked: The G20 Clean Gas Myth' finds that G20 countries, in the absence of new policies, are set to see investment of over $1.6 trillion USD in new gas projects. If this investment takes place - and if Argentina's Vaca Muerta shale gas reserves are developed - it would seriously jeopardize the climate goals set out in the Paris Agreement.
The report, published by Oil Change International and endorsed by over 20 organizations around the world, finds the following:
The concept of fossil gas as a "bridge fuel" to a stable climate is a myth. Emissions from existing gas fields, alongside existing oil and coal development, already exceed carbon budgets aligned with the Paris Agreement. Even if all coal mines were shut down tomorrow, the gas and oil in already-developed fields alone would take the world beyond the carbon budget for a 50% chance at staying below 1.5oC of global warming.
Despite this reality, G20 countries are projected to host investment of over $1.6 trillion USD in new gas projects by 2030. If this happens, emissions unlocked through 2050 would make it extremely difficult to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, which has been signed by all G20 members.
Five countries - the United States, Russia, Australia, China, and Canada - are projected to be responsible for 75% of capital expenditures in gas production in G20 countries from 2018-2030.
Argentina's push to open massive shale gas deposits to investment risks undermining its commitment to the Paris Agreement and the work of the Energy Transitions Working Group during its G20 Presidency.
This report is one of two reports published simultaneously that question the ongoing push for expanding fossil gas production in G20 countries.
This report, 'Debunked: The G20 Clean Gas Myth,' focuses on fossil gas development in the G20 and debunking the myth of fossil gas as a clean transition fuel. It is published by Oil Change International and available at: https://priceofoil.org/debunked-g20-clean-gas-myth
A partner report, 'Debunked: The Promise of Argentina's Vaca Muerta Shale Play,' published by Greenpeace in Argentina, focuses on the myths surrounding the development of shale gas in Argentina, particularly the Vaca Muerta shale play. It is available at: https://priceofoil.org/debunked-vaca-muerta
Reactions:
Stephen Kretzmann, Executive Director of Oil Change International:
"The idea that fossil gas could be a bridge to clean energy dates back to the time when cell phones were tethered to briefcase-size batteries. Fossil gas today is just one more dirty energy source now completely bypassed by newer, cleaner, cheaper, and better technology. It's time for the G20 to follow through on their commitment to end fossil fuel subsidies, and to begin to discuss how to limit production of all fossil fuels in line with the Paris Agreement's goals."
Lidy Nacpil, Coordinator of the Asian Peoples' Movement on Debt and Development:
"The world does not have the time nor the space to use gas as bridge or transition fuel. We need to fully decarbonize by 2050 if we are to have a good chance of preventing the climate crisis from reaching catastrophic levels. And that means phasing out the use of all fossil fuels as fast as possible. Those who argue for stepping up production and consumption of gas in the transition are either conveniently ignorant of the science or are deliberately deceptive."
Dr. Katherine Kramer, Climate Change Global Lead of Christian Aid:
"The G20 presents an opportunity for economically powerful countries to debunk the dangerous myth that fossil gas can act as a bridging fuel to a low carbon future. Fossil gas is a false solution, all the more egregious when there are sustainable renewable sources of energy that are cost-effective and provide energy access for the poorest people through using indigenous wind and solar. Why 'bridge' when you can leapfrog to truly clean energy?"
Paul Horsman, Greenpeace Andino Project Leader:
"Opening more oil, gas and coal reserves condemns the world to more deadly climate impacts. Governments should take responsibility, keep to their Paris Agreement pledges, and stop spending billions of dollars to open even more reserves that neglect the rights of citizens and the environment. People are already paying with their lives and livelihoods for oil and gas extraction, only a shift to massively expand renewable energy sources will guarantee economic success and protect us and our children."
The report was researched and written by Oil Change International, and can be found at https://priceofoil.org/debunked-g20-clean-gas-myth.
It is endorsed by African Climate Reality Project, Amazon Watch, Asian Peoples' Movement on Debt & Development, Christian Aid, Earthworks, Engajamundo, Food & Water Europe, Food & Water Watch, Greenpeace, Health of Mother Earth Foundation, Leave it in the Ground Initiative, Legambiente, Observatori del Deute en la Globalitzacio, Platform, Rainforest Action Network, Re:Common, Stand.earth, the UK Youth Climate Coalition, urgewald, and 350.org.
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029LATEST NEWS
UK Protest Group Condemns 'Orwellian' Arrest Over Projected Trump-Epstein Images
“We’re constantly told, you know, we need to see peaceful protests," said one organizer. "Well, here’s a peaceful protest."
Sep 17, 2025
The leaders of the UK-based protest group Led By Donkeys said Wednesday that four of its members remained under arrest for displaying images of US President Donald Trump and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on the side of Windsor Castle ahead of Trump's second state visit to the United Kingdom.
The widely available images were accompanied by a narration discussing Trump and Epstein's friendship, as well as pictures of Epstein's victims, police reports, and news reports about the case.
Trump began his visit, on which he'll meet with King Charles and other members of the royal family as well as Prime Minister Keir Starmer, amid growing scrutiny of the US Department of Justice's decision not to release files related to the Epstein case as well as of the release of a letter the president reportedly sent to Epstein containing dialogue between the two men about a "wonderful secret" they shared.
The White House has denied the letter is authentic and Trump has claimed he was unaware of Epstein's criminal activities during his friendship with him.
Police said they arrested the four Led by Donkeys members on suspicion of "malicious communications" after they displayed the "unauthorized projection."
A spokesperson for Led By Donkeys told The Guardian the group has previously displayed "25 or 30 projections" without organizers being arrested.
"Often the police come along and we have a chat to them, and they even have a laugh with us and occasionally tell us to not do it," the spokesperson said. “But no one’s ever been arrested before, so it is ridiculous that four of our guys have been arrested for malicious communications.”
“Forgive the cliche, but it is rather Orwellian for a piece of journalism, which raises questions about our guest’s relationship with America’s most notorious child sex trafficker, to lead to arrests," they added.
King Charles' brother, Prince Andrew, has also been accused of sexually abusing teenage girls during his friendship with Epstein. He settled out of court with Virginia Giuffre, who sued him for allegedly abusing her, in 2022, after being stripped of his royal patronages.
While the projection was taken down and the protesters detained, Trump is unlikely to escape condemnation from members of the British public during his visit.
The group Everyone Hates Elon, which has previously displayed messages denouncing billionaire Trump ally and megadonor Elon Musk at bus stops around London, also unfurled a banner at Windsor Castle showing a picture of Trump and Epstein.
Protesters gathered in London Wednesday for a "Trump Not Welcome" march from Portland Place to Parliament Square, with some displaying the "Trump baby balloon" that became familiar after the president's first official visit to the UK in 2018, as well as balloons showing a caricature of Vice President JD Vance.
Demonstrators carried signs reading, "No to racism" and "Stop arming Israel," among other slogans.
“We do not want our government to trade away our democracy and decency,” Zoe Gardner, a spokesperson for the Stop Trump Coalition, told The Washington Post Wednesday.
A rallygoer named Alena Ivanova told the outlet that "there's a reason" Trump is spending much of his visit outside of the nation's capital, meeting with Starmer at his country estate and staying at Windsor Castle.
"People on the streets will say what our government seems unable to: Donald Trump is not welcome here," said Ivanova.
Observers in the UK view the invitation for a state visit as an attempt to appeal to the president as he threatens the country with tariffs and an end to aid for Ukraine.
"We want our government to show some backbone," Gardner told the BBC, "and have a little bit of pride and represent that huge feeling of disgust at Donald Trump's politics in the UK."
The Led By Donkeys spokesperson told The Guardian that the arrest of the four organizers "says a lot more about the policing of Trump's visit than it does about what we did."
More than 1,600 police officers have been deployed to respond to protests while Trump is in the UK.
“We’re constantly told, you know, we need to see peaceful protests. Well, here’s a peaceful protest," said the spokesperson. "We projected a piece of journalism on to a wall and now people have been arrested for malicious communications."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ben & Jerry's Co-Founder Steps Down in Protest of Corporate Owner's Attempts to 'Silence' Duo's Gaza Activism
"Ben & Jerry's has been silenced, sidelined for fear of upsetting those in power," said co-founder Jerry Greenfield.
Sep 17, 2025
Jerry Greenfield, the lifelong political activist and co-founder of the ice cream brand Ben & Jerry's, is quitting the company in protest against what he says are efforts by parent company Unilever to "silence" his advocacy for progressive causes, particularly for Palestinians amid Israel's genocidal war in Gaza.
"I can no longer, in good conscience, and after 47 years, remain an employee of Ben & Jerry's," Greenfield said in a statement posted Tuesday by his longtime partner Ben Cohen. "This is one of the hardest and most painful decisions I've ever made."
The Vermont-based ice cream company was acquired by Unilever, a British conglomerate, in 2000, at which time Greenfield says the company "guaranteed" him and his partner the "independence to pursue our values." Though the pair no longer had a financial stake in the company, which they founded in 1978, they remained on as board members and brand ambassadors.
"For more than twenty years under their ownership, Ben & Jerry's stood up and spoke out in support of peace, justice, and human rights, not as abstract concepts, but in relation to real events happening in our world," Greenfield said. "That independence existed in no small part because of the unique merger agreement Ben and I negotiated with Unilever, one that enshrined our social mission and values in the company's governance structure in perpetuity."
The relationship between Ben & Jerry's and its parent company began to fracture as Cohen and Greenfield became increasingly outspoken advocates against Israel's human rights abuses in Palestine.
In 2021, the duo announced that it would stop selling its ice cream in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in protest of Israel's occupation of those territories, which is widely recognized as illegal under international law. Several US states with laws punishing boycotts of Israel began to pull their investments in Unilever, which rushed to reaffirm that it was “firmly committed” to Israel.
In order to bypass the pair's boycott, Unilever sold the Israeli portion of Ben & Jerry's to a distributor in the country, which promptly resumed distribution in the Occupied Territories. The duo launched a lawsuit against their parent company in hopes of stopping the deal.
The rift would intensify further after October 7, 2023, when, following Hamas' attack against Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government responded with a crushing military onslaught against the Gaza Strip that has now resulted in at least 220,000 casualties according to one former Israeli general.
Ben & Jerry's would file another lawsuit in 2024 alleging that Unilever, on several occasions, used threats and intimidation to stop them from speaking out on the conflict, which they referred to as a "genocide."
They said Unilever threatened to dismantle the company's board if it issued statements calling for "peace" and a "ceasefire," imposed restrictions on their statements in support of pro-Palestine student demonstrators, and stopped them from donating company funds to human rights organizations. Ben & Jerry's would later claim that Unilever fired its CEO, David Stever in March 2025 in retaliation for the brand's activism.
This past May, Cohen was arrested, along with six others, for disrupting a US Senate hearing in protest of Washington's continued sale of weapons to Israel, which at that point had begun outlining plans to fully remove Palestinians from Gaza with support from President Donald Trump.
Unilever distanced itself from Cohen's actions, saying they were "on his own as an individual and not on behalf of Ben & Jerry's or Unilever."
Greenfield's departure comes as Unilever plans to fold Ben & Jerry's into a new entity known as the Magnum Ice Cream Company, which is set to be listed on the stock market in November. In response to the merger, Ben & Jerry's called for its brand to be "freed" from the conglomerate.
"They're ripping the heart out of Ben & Jerry's," Cohen said last week while brandishing a picket sign. "All we're asking is for them to sell the company to a group of people who support the values of Ben & Jerry's."
Magnum rejected this request, saying, "Ben & Jerry’s is a proud part of the Magnum Ice Cream Company and is not for sale."
"It's profoundly disappointing to come to the conclusion that that independence, the very basis of our sale to Unilever, is gone," Greenfield said in his resignation note. "And it's happening at a time when our country's current administration is attacking civil rights, voting rights, the rights of immigrants, women, and the LGBTQ community."
"Standing up for the values of justice, equity, and our shared humanity has never been more important," he continued, "and yet Ben & Jerry's has been silenced, sidelined for fear of upsetting those in power. It's easy to stand up and speak out when there's nothing at risk."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Backs Pride Flag Ban as Allies Spread False Claims Tying Transgender People to Violence
One rights advocate noted that the creator of the flag the president said he'd consider banning recently left the US due to fears of persecution under the Trump administration.
Sep 17, 2025
After false claims spread last week that a transgender person was behind the fatal shooting of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, US President Donald Trump and his allies are continuing to push the erroneous narrative that the transgender community is a danger to the American public.
Trump on Monday said that he'd consider banning LGBTQ pride flags as his political allies ratcheted up dehumanizing rhetoric.
During an exchange in the Oval Office, Real America's Voice correspondent Brian Glenn showed Trump a photo of a trans flag currently on display in Washington, DC, and claimed that "a lot of people are very threatened" by it.
"Would you be opposed to taking this flag down, up and down the streets of DC?" Glenn asked.
"Well, I wouldn't be," Trump replied. "Then they'll sue and they'll get freedom of speech stuff, you know, so that'll happen. But I would have no problem with it."
Trump then pivoted to saying that he wanted anyone who burned an American flag to "go to jail immediately."
The day after the president signaled his support for banning transgender pride flags, Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) likened the transgender rights movement to a “cancer” and suggested detaining all transgender people in the United States.
In an interview with Newsmax, Jackson baselessly said that transgender women "have an underlying level of aggressiveness" and suggested they be forcibly committed to mental institutions.
"We have to treat these people," he said. "We have to get them off the streets, and we have to get them off the internet, and we can't let them communicate with each other. I'm all about free speech, but this is a virus, this is a cancer that's spreading across this country."
In response to Trump's attack on the transgender flag, ACLU communications strategist Gillian Branstetter pointed out that the transgender activist who created the symbol, Monica Helms, recently left the US "for fear of her safety as a trans person under Trump."
After the assassination of Kirk—who also falsely connected transgender people to mass shootings with no evidence—right-wing commentators quickly reacted by claiming the attacker was transgender and federal agents reported early on in their investigation that symbols of "transgender ideology" were found at the crime scene—a claim that was amplified by the Wall Street Journal.
In reality, mass shootings carried out by transgender individuals represent a minuscule fraction of the total number of mass shootings carried out in the US, and there is no evidence that transgender people are disproportionately likely to engage in acts of violence.
Laura Loomer, once a fringe far-right internet commentator and conspiracy theorist who is now an influential informal adviser to the president, has also been ramping up attacks against the transgender movement, and she even went so far this week as to demand that gender-affirming care be completely banned by executive order.
"It’s time to designate the transgender movement as a terrorist movement," she wrote in a social media post. "Trans people are a threat to society. We can’t allow them to continue killing people. They need to be socially ostracized and the president should make medical transitioning ILLEGAL in our country."
Conservative attacks on the transgender movement have persisted in the wake of the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, despite the fact that the alleged killer, Tyler Robinson, was not himself transgender.
Evidence released by prosecutors on Tuesday showed that Robinson's transgender partner refused Robinson's request to delete incriminating text messages the two had exchanged. The partner subsequently shared these messages with law enforcement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular