

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.

Email: info [at] priceofoil.org
After two weeks of talks, pledges and meetings in Glasgow, a scathing report has cut through the rhetoric of five wealthy nations, including the COP Hosts, by reviewing their plans to expand the production of the primary cause of climate change - fossil fuels.
After two weeks of talks, pledges and meetings in Glasgow, a scathing report has cut through the rhetoric of five wealthy nations, including the COP Hosts, by reviewing their plans to expand the production of the primary cause of climate change - fossil fuels.
The report, coined The Fossil Fuelled 5, finds that the gap between climate rhetoric and reality is dangerously wide, with wealthy nations -- the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Norway and Australia -- planning to approve and subsidise new fossil fuel projects which undermines their recent claims of leadership in addressing the climate crisis.
The report that analysed recent government announcements and the latest data on fossil fuel production found that:
There is an alarming gap between what the Fossil Fuelled 5 are pledging to do to reduce their domestic emissions and their plans to expand fossil fuel production, undermining efforts to curtail global emissions and ignoring their responsibility to phase out fossil fuels, rapidly and justly.
Coal, oil and gas production must fall globally by 69%, 31% and 28% respectively between now and 2030 to keep the 1.5oC target alive. However, the projections suggest that the Fossil Fuelled 5 will reduce coal production by only 30%, and actually increase oil and gas production by 33% and 27%, respectively. As wealthy nations, the Fossil Fuelled 5 should be leading this transition away from fossil fuels.
Despite their net zero targets and climate pledges these five nations alone have provided over $150 billion in public support for the fossil fuel production and consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic. This level of support to fossil fuel production is more than the entire G7 put towards clean energy as part of the pandemic recovery ($147 billion).
The report released today on the final day of COP26, led by Freddie Daley from the University of Sussex, synthesises the most recent government emissions pledges and compares them to the fossil fuel production plans in the coming decade, as well as other factors such as fossil fuel subsidies. They show that several of the world's wealthiest nations "are doubling down on fossil fuel production" which will "have disastrous impacts for all life on our planet, but especially those communities in the Global South who have done the least to create this crisis and have the fewest resources to adapt to its impacts."
Despite their historical responsibility for emissions, and being well-placed to finance a global just transition, these countries are also guilty of exporting large amounts of coal, oil and gas, fuelling other countries' dependency on dirty energy sources.
Lead author Freddie Daley, Research Associate at the University of Sussex, said:
"There's an alarming gap between what wealthy nations are saying and what they are doing. You would expect these five nations to provide the leadership needed to move the global economy away from fossil fuels and reduce emissions to zero. However, they seem to be quite content to make pledges and promises with one hand, while expanding and subsidising fossil fuel production to the tune of billions on the other.
"Not only are these wealthy nations jeopardising their own futures and the futures of their citizens through this continued expansion, but they are condemning communities in the global south to a state of perpetual crisis which they did nothing to create. If these nations want to be climate pioneers, it is time they addressed the elephant in the room: fossil fuels."
Country-specific analysis from the paper's country profiles include:
The United States has pledged to halve emissions by 2030 yet have simultaneously provided $20 billion in annual support to the fossil fuel industry.
Despite hosting COP26, the United Kingdom is expected to green light the Cambo oil field, which contains approximately 255 million barrels of oil.
Canada is looking to increase their price on carbon but also provided approximately $17 billion in public finance to three fossil fuel pipelines between 2018 and 2020.
Norway has raised its ambition to decrease emissions but has already granted 60+ new licenses for fossil fuel production and access to 84 new exploration zones in 2021 alone.
Despite its recent commitment to net zero by 2050, Australia has over 100 fossil fuel projects currently in the approval pipeline.
The paper was produced by the University of Sussex and conducted in cooperation with the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, Oil Change International, Uplift UK, Greenpeace Norway, The Australia Institute, and Stand.earth.
Collin Rees, U.S. Program Manager, Oil Change International:
"The United States is the poster child for climate hypocrisy -- the world's largest historical emitter claiming the mantle of climate leadership while pouring fuel on the fire of the climate crisis. Joe Biden's words will ring hollow until he cancels deadly fossil fuel expansion projects like the Dakota Access Pipeline or the dozens of proposed oil and gas export terminals awaiting approval from his administration. This new report makes it clear the U.S. remains a massive driver of oil and gas expansion, and that won't change until our leaders commit to a managed phase-out of fossil fuel extraction that truly protects communities, workers, and the climate."
Tzeporah Berman, Chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty:
"Canada claims to be a climate leader yet its emissions have continued to rise since signing the Paris Agreement. This is not surprising given the unwillingness of political leaders to address the largest source of emissions - oil and gas. While important steps have been taken such as putting a price on carbon nationally, the Canadian government subsidizes the sector more than any other G20 nation. The Fossil Fuelled 5 report highlights why Canada is standing in the way of binding agreements for a wind down of oil, gas and coal at COP26. It's not too late to turn things around. When the Minister of Environment and Climate Change returns to Canada, it's imperative that we have a plan for winding down emissions and production so that no worker nor their family is left behind. This would include a meaningful cap placed on emissions from the oil and gas industry plus no more investment in the Trans Mountain pipeline or LNG. Canada must then rejoin the international negotiating table with a real intention to be part of the solution, rather than accelerating the climate emergency."
Tessa Khan, Founder & Director of Uplift UK:
"The UK government has invested a lot in trying to persuade people that it is taking action to tackle the climate crisis, but while it is still opening up new oil and gas fields we can discount most of it as hot air. We know that there can't be any fossil fuel developments if we want a liveable climate and yet the UK government wants to open 30 new oil and gas fields in the North Sea, starting with Cambo. And all the while subsiding fossil fuel companies to the tune of billions. Actions matter now not words. Just stop talking, Prime Minister and instead, stop Cambo."
Frode Pleym, Executive Director of Greenpeace Norway:
"The use of fossil fuels is the number one reason we are currently facing a climate emergency. Yet, the wealthiest countries with the greatest capacity to rapidly transition away from fossil fuels, keep allowing and even subsidising the development of new oil, gas and coal. It's time for the leaders of countries such as Norway to come together and lead the way out of climate chaos once and for all."
Richie Merizan, Climate & Energy Program Director at The Australia Institute:
"Not only is the Morrison Government unrepentant about Australia's fossil fuels production and export plans through to 2050 and beyond, it is openly boasting about these plans here at Glasgow. PM Morrison's Net Zero target does nothing to stop fossil fuel expansion, and goes so far as to explicitly build their continued use into its plan to reduce emissions. While the world moves forward in phasing out fossil fuels - a key aim of this COP, the Morrison Government is intent on driving Australia backwards. Australia is a wealthy country and is in the box seat to be leading the renewable energy transition."
The full report is available here.
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) 518-9029"Chavez-DeRemer failed to protect workers, jeopardized the Department of Labor's work to support the economy, drove down morale among agency staff, and abused federal government resources to serve her own whims."
President Donald Trump's "scandal-ridden" Department of Labor leader, Lori Chavez-DeRemer, resigned from her post on Monday, making her the third member of his Cabinet to leave since the beginning of the year, following the firings of former US Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Confirming reports of the latest departure, White House spokesperson Steven Cheung said that "Chavez-DeRemer will be leaving the administration to take a position in the private sector. She has done a phenomenal job in her role by protecting American workers, enacting fair labor practices, and helping Americans gain additional skills to improve their lives."
Her deputy, Keith Sonderling, "will take on the role of acting secretary of labor," Cheung added.
As Politico noted Monday, "Chavez-DeRemer has been under scrutiny since January, when DOL Inspector General Anthony D'Esposito opened an investigation into allegations that she was involved in an extramarital affair with a member of her security detail, that she drank on the job, and that top aides concocted official events to facilitate her personal travel plans."
That probe led to allegations—initially reported by The New York Times in February—that the secretary's husband, Shawn DeRemer, "has been barred from the department's headquarters after at least two female staff members told officials that he had sexually assaulted them." DeRemer denied the claims, and police have reportedly closed a related investigation.
As NOTUS reported Monday:
A source close to the president told NOTUS last week that the White House viewed Chavez-DeRemer as an effective spokesperson for the president's economic message and implementer of workforce policy. But the tales of the labor secretary's alleged scandals had become palace intrigue among people close to and inside of the White House.
Two Republicans who speak with President Donald Trump told NOTUS they expected him to pull the trigger on removing Chavez-DeRemer on Wednesday, when she was due for what was expected to be a bruising hearing in Congress. Some inside the White House anticipated Democrats at the hearing would focus on Chavez-DeRemer's alleged transgressions.
Responding to the resignation on social media, the Democratic Party highlighted Bondi and Noem's ousters, and declared, "This administration is imploding."
Before joining Trump's Cabinet, the outgoing secretary represented Oregon's 5th Congressional District in the US House of Representatives. Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, a Democrat who serves the state's 1st District, said that "Chavez-DeRemer failed to protect workers, jeopardized the Department of Labor's work to support the economy, drove down morale among agency staff, and abused federal government resources to serve her own whims. She should be held accountable for the damage that occurred on her watch."
Only a tiny fraction of the already inadequate $17 billion pledged for Gaza reconstruction via US President Donald Trump's so-called "Board of Peace" has reportedly been received.
A joint assessment published Monday by the European Union, United Nations, and World Bank found that an estimated $71.4 billion is needed over the next decade for recovery and reconstruction in the Gaza Strip, where 30 months of Israeli genocide has set human development back by an entire lifetime.
The Gaza Strip Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) states that the $71.4 billion figure includes an estimated $26.3 billion required over the next 18 months "to restore essential service, rebuild critical infrastructure, and support economic recovery."
"Physical infrastructure damages are estimated at $35.2 billion, with economic and social losses amounting to $22.7 billion," the report continues. "The hardest-hit sectors include housing, health, education, commerce, and agriculture. Over 371,888 housing units have been destroyed or damaged, more than 50% of hospitals are nonfunctional, nearly all schools destroyed or damaged, and the economy has contracted by 84% in Gaza."
"Catastrophic impact on human development across Gaza... is estimated to have been set back by 77 years," the RDNA states. "Around 1.9 million people have been displaced, often multiple times, and more than 60% of the population has lost their homes."
"Women, children, persons with disabilities, and those with preexisting vulnerabilities bear the greatest burden," the publication adds.
The new analysis follows a November 2025 UN Conference on Trade and Development report that found Israel's assault on Gaza has caused “the most severe economic crisis ever recorded."
The Israeli war has left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing; the strip in ruins; and most of its approximately 2 million people forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened.
“Over two years of conflict has resulted in more than 71,000 Palestinian fatalities and over 171,000 injured, and many are missing under the rubble," the report notes.
With the vast majority of Gaza's buildings damaged or destroyed, separate UN analyses have estimated that it could take as many as 80 years to rebuild the obliterated coastal exclave.
So far, roughly $17 billion in pledged funding has been announced through the so-called "Board of Peace" launched by US President Donald Trump, whose ideas for rebuilding Gaza have included kicking Palestinians out and turning the strip into what he called the "Riviera of the Middle East."
Only a "tiny fraction" of that already inadequate $17 billion has been received, Reuters reported earlier this month.
"When wildlife is already under immense pressure from habitat destruction, climate change, pollution, and industrial development, Congress should be strengthening the Endangered Species Act," said one advocate.
Conservationists warned Monday that "Earth Day could become Extinction Day" if Republican leaders in the US House of Representatives get their way.
Elected Republicans have long set their sights on the historic Endangered Species Act of 1973—and wildfire defenders sounded the alarm in December, when the Republican-led House Natural Resources Committee advanced Chair Bruce Westerman's (R-Ark.) ESA Amendments Act.
"If this bill passes, protections for species like the Florida manatee, monarch butterfly, and California spotted owl would immediately decrease," Earthjustice legislative director for lands, wildlife, and oceans Addie Haughey warned at the time.
Since then, President Donald Trump has continued his war on endangered species with his budget request for the 2027 fiscal year, and his administration's so-called "God Squad" unanimously approved an "unprecedented" exemption allowing fossil fuel operations in the Gulf of Mexico to ignore ESA protections.
Now, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) plans to take up Westerman's bill this week—potentially on Wednesday, Earth Day.
"At a time when wildlife is already under immense pressure from habitat destruction, climate change, pollution, and industrial development, Congress should be strengthening the Endangered Species Act, not tearing it apart," said Jewel Tomasula, policy director of the Endangered Species Coalition, which has hundreds of member organizations.
"If Rep. Bruce Westerman and Speaker Johnson have their way, Earth Day will become Extinction Day," Tomasula warned. "The urgency is real. This bill is catastrophic for threatened and endangered species."
Susan Holmes, the coalition's executive director, emphasized that "the Endangered Species Act works because it is rooted in science and because it recognizes a simple truth: Once a species is gone, it is gone forever."
"We should not allow politicians to dismantle protections that have saved bald eagles, gray whales, peregrine falcons, and so many other species from disappearing forever," she declared.
Holmes also noted that "the American people overwhelmingly support the Endangered Species Act" and "understand that protecting wildlife is not a partisan issue. It is about responsibility, stewardship, and ensuring that future generations inherit a world still rich with wild species and wild places."
Polling commissioned by IFAW and conducted online last year by Beekeeper Group found that over three-quarters of Americans say they are concerned about the environment, the welfare of animals, and conserving nature, and specifically support the goals of the ESA. That aligns with figures from surveys conducted over the past three decades, according to a 2025 analysis.
The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on the so-called "ESA Amendments Act" (H.R. 1897) on Earth Day, April 22. H.R. 1897 would drastically weaken the Endangered Species Act and decrease protections for threatened and endangered species.TAKE ACTION >>> wildernesswatch.substack.com/p/the-extinc...
[image or embed]
— Wilderness Watch (@wildernesswatch.bsky.social) April 20, 2026 at 3:23 PM
"Protecting the nation's wildlife and habitats has never been an issue of right or left—it is a shared value and a commitment to future generations," said Cassie Ferri, legislative analyst at Defenders of Wildlife, in a Monday statement. "Instead of honoring Earth Day, Congress is turning it into 'Destroy Earth Day' by attempting to dismantle one of our nation's most foundational conservation laws. We all depend on healthy ecosystems to thrive, and the vast majority of Americans want to preserve wildlife through a strong Endangered Species Act—yet time and again Congress blatantly disregards their voices."
The advocacy group director of legislative affairs, Mary Beth Beetham, said that "shameless attempts by some members of Congress to dismantle the Endangered Species Act demonstrate a profound disregard for how valuable this law is to wildlife conservation."
"The Endangered Species Act isn't just rhetoric—it's proven effective and has safeguarded imperiled species for more than 50 years," Beetham stressed. "This bill could be the driving force behind future extinctions and would set a dangerous precedent for wildlife legislation moving forward."
The U.S. House is expected to vote on H.R. 1897 next week—the most dangerous bill facing endangered species right now! It prioritizes profits over science-based safeguards and blocks judicial review. ACT NOW and tell your lawmakers #NOHR1897!ACT NOW at TeamWolf.Org!
[image or embed]
— Team Wolf (@team-wolf.bsky.social) April 17, 2026 at 4:01 PM
Defenders of Wildlife is among nearly 300 groups that have signed on to a Monday letter—shared with Common Dreams by another signatory, Humane World for Animals—urging US House members to "vote NO on HR 1897, which is a damaging bill that would dramatically weaken the ESA and make it harder, if not impossible, to achieve the progress we must make to address the alarming rate of extinction our planet now faces."
Westerman's bill, the letter says, "would significantly rewrite key portions of the ESA to prioritize politics over science and inappropriately shift responsibility for key implementation decisions from the federal government to the states, many of which do not have sufficient resources or legal mechanisms in place to take the lead in conserving listed species."
"It would place significant new administrative burdens on already overburdened agencies," the letter continues. "It would turn the current process for listing and recovering threatened and endangered species into a far lengthier process that precludes judicial review of key decisions."
While Republicans can pass legislation along party lines in the House, they usually need at least some Democratic support in the Senate—due to chamber rules, which can be changed—to send a bill to Trump's desk.