The China Mail - Oil majors' climate visions 'inconsistent' with Paris targets

USD -
AED 3.67295
AFN 66.503991
ALL 80.603989
AMD 366.170403
AOA 917.000367
ARS 1491.937904
AUD 1.414627
AWG 1.80125
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.696506
BBD 2.013896
BDT 123.776354
BHD 0.377104
BIF 2987.5
BMD 1
BND 1.281271
BOB 11.884005
BRL 5.083304
BSD 0.999879
BTN 95.145572
BWP 13.496235
BYN 2.977343
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010921
CAD 1.39555
CDF 2262.50392
CHF 0.80802
CLF 0.023137
CLP 913.560396
CNY 6.747604
CNH 6.743285
COP 3157.16
CRC 454.53954
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.703894
CZK 20.982104
DJF 177.720393
DKK 6.46804
DOP 58.250393
DZD 132.93304
EGP 49.555853
ERN 15
ETB 160.000358
EUR 0.86495
FJD 2.20855
FKP 0.740916
GBP 0.741235
GEL 2.610391
GGP 0.740916
GHS 11.76039
GIP 0.740916
GMD 73.503851
GNF 8775.000355
GTQ 7.628986
GYD 209.187745
HKD 7.84315
HNL 26.880388
HRK 6.518804
HTG 130.738004
HUF 314.060388
IDR 17801
ILS 2.99985
IMP 0.740916
INR 95.13785
IQD 1310.5
IRR 1375550.000352
ISK 123.340386
JEP 0.740916
JMD 158.790465
JOD 0.70904
JPY 157.80604
KES 128.780385
KGS 87.450384
KHR 4052.503796
KMF 426.00035
KRW 1407.890383
KWD 0.30866
KYD 0.833247
KZT 468.616634
LAK 22582.503779
LBP 89550.000349
LKR 335.380452
LRD 181.550382
LSL 16.130381
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.365039
MAD 9.305039
MDL 17.387495
MGA 4310.000347
MKD 53.374161
MMK 2099.750695
MNT 3597.347644
MOP 8.079926
MRU 40.090379
MUR 47.050378
MVR 15.450378
MWK 1737.000345
MXN 17.136204
MYR 4.090104
MZN 63.905039
NAD 16.250377
NGN 1364.860377
NIO 36.795607
NOK 9.51237
NPR 152.232915
NZD 1.696641
OMR 0.382792
PAB 0.999866
PEN 3.385039
PGK 4.42225
PHP 60.705038
PKR 277.803701
PLN 3.719205
PYG 5945.498155
QAR 3.644504
RON 4.536304
RSD 102.024038
RUB 81.892834
RWF 1465
SAR 3.780227
SBD 8.065696
SCR 14.475038
SDG 600.503676
SEK 9.480804
SGD 1.278204
SLE 24.603667
SOS 600.503662
SRD 37.866504
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.375
SVC 8.749095
SZL 16.245038
THB 33.050369
TJS 9.223917
TMT 3.51
TND 2.912038
TRY 47.697504
TTD 6.777323
TWD 32.250604
TZS 2647.503038
UAH 44.783463
UGX 3724.827703
UYU 40.249652
UZS 11950.000334
VES 755.762404
VND 26204.5
VUV 119.414824
WST 2.733661
XAF 568.992228
XAG 0.015756
XAU 0.00023
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.802071
XDR 0.708194
XOF 568.000332
XPF 103.350363
YER 238.403589
ZAR 16.14632
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 18.872278
ZWL 321.999592
  • CMSC

    0.0240

    21.744

    +0.11%

  • RIO

    1.4500

    101.1

    +1.43%

  • NGG

    0.4700

    80.88

    +0.58%

  • BCC

    2.3400

    86.6

    +2.7%

  • BCE

    -0.0200

    22.75

    -0.09%

  • BTI

    0.6000

    59.33

    +1.01%

  • GSK

    0.7900

    52.96

    +1.49%

  • CMSD

    -0.1600

    21.82

    -0.73%

  • AZN

    1.4100

    161.42

    +0.87%

  • RBGPF

    0.7600

    70.5

    +1.08%

  • RYCEF

    0.2300

    20.85

    +1.1%

  • JRI

    0.1500

    12.81

    +1.17%

  • VOD

    0.1900

    16.19

    +1.17%

  • RELX

    0.0485

    35.52

    +0.14%

  • BP

    -0.6000

    41.63

    -1.44%

Oil majors' climate visions 'inconsistent' with Paris targets
Oil majors' climate visions 'inconsistent' with Paris targets / Photo: © GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP/File

Oil majors' climate visions 'inconsistent' with Paris targets

Global decarbonisation scenarios envisioned by oil and gas majors are incompatible with the Paris climate deal temperature goals aimed at averting devastating heating, according to research published Tuesday.

Text size:

The landmark 2015 accord saw nations commit to limit planetary heating to "well below" two degrees Celsius (3.6 Farenheit) above pre-industrial levels and to work towards a safer 1.5-C warming cap.

Writing in the journal Nature Communications, an international team of experts analysed six emissions scenarios from three European energy giants -- Equinor, BP and Shell -- as well as those produced by the International Energy Agency.

They then compared the analysed pathways to scenarios outlined in a special report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on 1.5C of warming.

The team used these to evaluate peak and end-of-century temperatures under each scenario, noting that average global temperatures may decline by 2100 in some scenarios after peaking.

They also assessed the underlying energy system changes that drive emissions and could lead to a given scenario meeting -- or failing to meet -- the Paris temperature goals.

"Most of the scenarios we evaluated would be classified as inconsistent with the Paris Agreement as they fail to limit warming to 'well below 2C', let alone 1.5C, and would exceed the 1.5C warming limit by a significant margin," said Robert Brecha of the Climate Analytics think tank and co-lead author of the study.

"Energy system transformation is critical to reaching the Paris Agreement warming limit, and decision makers need sound and transparent scientific assessments. This paper adds to that transparency."

- 'Catastrophic impacts' -

The analysis found that Shell's Sky scenario would lead to warming of 1.81C by 2069 -- a far cry from 1.5C.

A Shell spokeswoman told AFP that the Sky pathway was just one of several envisaged by the company.

The team responsible for modelling scenarios "makes assessments based on plausible assumptions and quantifications, which are not intended to be predictions of likely future events or outcomes, let alone our energy transition plan", she added.

Equinor's Rebalance scenario would see warming peak at 1.73C above pre-industrial levels by 2060, according to the study.

BP's Rapid scenario would see peak warming of 1.73C by 2058, while its Net Zero scenario would see median warming peak at 1.65C, the analysis found.

Equinor declined to comment, while BP did not respond to a comment request.

Only the IEA's Net Zero 2050 pathway is fully aligned with the Paris agreement's 1.5C goal, the authors concluded.

"Fossil fuel companies claim that we can continue to burn oil and gas while keeping to the 1.5C warming limit, and they cite their own scenarios as justification," said Bill Hare, CEO and Senior Scientist at Climate Analytics.

"But our research shows that their pathways would bust the Paris Agreement. Even temporarily exceeding the 1.5C warming would lead to catastrophic impacts and severely weaken our ability to adapt to climate change."

O.Yip--ThChM