[ad_1]
Over 80% of company engagement in Carbon Seize contradicts local weather science.
In a groundbreaking examine launched on Sunday, InfluenceMap, a non-profit suppose tank devoted to offering goal evaluation on the environmental affect of corporations and monetary establishments, sheds gentle on regarding disparities between company advocacy on carbonseize and established scientific rules.The great evaluation scrutinized greater than 750 cases of company engagement associated to carbon seize and storage (CCS) between 2021 and 2023, encompassing over 500 main world corporations and 250 business associations.
The examine’s lead researcher, Sofia Basheer, a senior analyst at InfluenceMap, expressed the shift in focus from undermining public belief within the science of local weather change causes to sowing confusion about local weather change options.
Key Findings of the Research:
Scientific Misalignment: Over 80% of company engagements on CCS don’t align with the Intergovernmental Panel on Local weather Change’s (IPCC) Science-Based mostly Coverage steerage. These engagements fall into two classes: indiscriminate promotion of CCS with out scientific alignment and specific efforts to impede the transition from fossil fuels.
Dominance of Oil, Gasoline, and Utility Sectors: 58% of all advocacy on CCS comes from oil, gasoline, and utility corporations, using numerous ways corresponding to public relations, promoting campaigns, and regulatory lobbying. Main gamers embrace Occidental Petroleum, ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Santos, and Cenovus, alongside influential business associations just like the Australian Vitality Producers, Worldwide Affiliation of Oil and Gasoline Producers (IOGP), Canadian Affiliation of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), and American Petroleum Institute (API).
Conflicting claims with science: Company CCS advocacy usually conflicts with science, with recurring claims selling oil and gasoline enlargement, positioning CCS as central to world local weather targets, and touting CCS as helpful for job creation and neighborhood assist.
Coordinated playbook in oil and gasoline Sector: The evaluation reveals proof of a coordinated playbook shared amongst world oil and gasoline sectors, led by business teams such because the Australian Vitality Producers, IOGP, CAPP, and API.
International alignment with fossil gasoline corporations: Sixteen G-20 nations have adopted positions on CCS much like fossil gasoline corporations within the run-up to the COP 28 Summit, indicating profitable business affect on authorities positions.
The examine emphasizes the restricted position of CCS in attaining net-zero vitality programs, as highlighted by the IPCC. It additionally cautions towards the fantasy of constant business-as-usual for oil and gasoline whereas counting on widespread carbon seize to chop emissions, as said by Fatih Birol, government director of the Worldwide Vitality Company.
Along with these findings, InfluenceMap’s evaluation exposes company advocacy ways undermining established science, together with lobbying for substantial tax breaks to commercialize CCS on the expense of different decarbonization pathways.
Sofia Basheer warns, “If governments fail to agree on a science-based plan to realize net-zero, and fossil fuels persist, the oil and gasoline industries can have gained a serious victory.”
In a groundbreaking examine launched on Sunday, InfluenceMap, a non-profit suppose tank devoted to offering goal evaluation on the environmental affect of corporations and monetary establishments, sheds gentle on regarding disparities between company advocacy on carbonseize and established scientific rules.The great evaluation scrutinized greater than 750 cases of company engagement associated to carbon seize and storage (CCS) between 2021 and 2023, encompassing over 500 main world corporations and 250 business associations.
The examine’s lead researcher, Sofia Basheer, a senior analyst at InfluenceMap, expressed the shift in focus from undermining public belief within the science of local weather change causes to sowing confusion about local weather change options.
Key Findings of the Research:
Scientific Misalignment: Over 80% of company engagements on CCS don’t align with the Intergovernmental Panel on Local weather Change’s (IPCC) Science-Based mostly Coverage steerage. These engagements fall into two classes: indiscriminate promotion of CCS with out scientific alignment and specific efforts to impede the transition from fossil fuels.
Dominance of Oil, Gasoline, and Utility Sectors: 58% of all advocacy on CCS comes from oil, gasoline, and utility corporations, using numerous ways corresponding to public relations, promoting campaigns, and regulatory lobbying. Main gamers embrace Occidental Petroleum, ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Santos, and Cenovus, alongside influential business associations just like the Australian Vitality Producers, Worldwide Affiliation of Oil and Gasoline Producers (IOGP), Canadian Affiliation of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), and American Petroleum Institute (API).
Conflicting claims with science: Company CCS advocacy usually conflicts with science, with recurring claims selling oil and gasoline enlargement, positioning CCS as central to world local weather targets, and touting CCS as helpful for job creation and neighborhood assist.
Coordinated playbook in oil and gasoline Sector: The evaluation reveals proof of a coordinated playbook shared amongst world oil and gasoline sectors, led by business teams such because the Australian Vitality Producers, IOGP, CAPP, and API.
International alignment with fossil gasoline corporations: Sixteen G-20 nations have adopted positions on CCS much like fossil gasoline corporations within the run-up to the COP 28 Summit, indicating profitable business affect on authorities positions.
The examine emphasizes the restricted position of CCS in attaining net-zero vitality programs, as highlighted by the IPCC. It additionally cautions towards the fantasy of constant business-as-usual for oil and gasoline whereas counting on widespread carbon seize to chop emissions, as said by Fatih Birol, government director of the Worldwide Vitality Company.
Along with these findings, InfluenceMap’s evaluation exposes company advocacy ways undermining established science, together with lobbying for substantial tax breaks to commercialize CCS on the expense of different decarbonization pathways.
Sofia Basheer warns, “If governments fail to agree on a science-based plan to realize net-zero, and fossil fuels persist, the oil and gasoline industries can have gained a serious victory.”
[ad_2]
