• 3 minutes UAE says four vessels subjected to 'sabotage' near Fujairah port
  • 6 minutes Why is Strait of Hormuz the World's Most Important Oil Artery
  • 8 minutes OPEC is no longer an Apex Predator
  • 12 minutes Mueller Report Brings Into Focus Obama's Attempted Coup Against Trump
  • 12 hours Did Saudi Arabia pull a "Jussie Smollett" and fake an attack on themselves to justify indiscriminate bombing on Yemen city population ?
  • 12 hours "We cannot be relying on fossil fuels to burn as an energy source at all in our country" - Canadian NDP Political Leader
  • 13 hours Solar Industry Lays Claim To The 2020s; Kicks Off The Solar+ Decade
  • 7 hours China Downplays Chances For Trade Talks While U.S. Plays ‘Little Tricks’
  • 2 hours California Threatens Ban on ICE Cars
  • 11 mins Canada's Uncivil Oil War : 78% of Voters Cite *Energy* as the Top Issue
  • 1 day DUG Rockies: Plenty Of Promise, Despite The Politics
  • 20 hours Iran v USA the perfect fire triangle
  • 17 hours U.S. and Turkey
  • 10 hours Shell ‘to have commercial wind farms’ by early 2020s
  • 9 hours Get First Access To The Oilprice App!
  • 1 hour How can Trump 'own' a trade war?
  • 2 hours China, U.S. Hold 'Productive' Trade Talks In Beijing
Alt Text

Oil Slips Despite Bullish OPEC Report

Oil prices fell on Thursday…

Irina Slav

Irina Slav

Irina is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry.

More Info

Trending Discussions

Report: Big Oil Is Spending ‘’Too Much’’ On New Oil Production

Big Oil plans to spend nearly US$5 trillion in capital expenditure over the next decade, much of which would go into adding new production. Yet this money will also bring the world farther from the Paris Agreement climate targets, a report from energy industry-focused nonprofit Global Witness warns.

The organization analyzed a report compiled by the International Panel on Climate Change last year and then compared the data with the spending plans of the oil and gas industry. What it found was that investment in any new oil and gas field development was “incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C.”

This is the lower target set in the Paris Agreement for the rate at which the Earth warms. The higher and preferable target is 2°C, but it is the less realistically achievable one. The 1.5°C target, however, may be achieved if a lot of things change fast, the IPCC report concluded last year.

Yet Global Witness did not stop there. The organization also calculated that current oil production should be cut by 9 percent and gas production should be reduced by 6 percent if the 1.5°C goal is to be achieved. It also noted in its report that all of the energy industry’s US$4.9-trillion capex planned for the next ten years was “incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C.”

The argument runs as follows: if the world is to limit the rise in the average global temperature to 1.5°C, work must be done to reduce its reliance on oil and gas. If this work is successful, all these trillions Big Oil plans to spend on production expansion will be the worst spent money ever. If the work on limiting the rise of temperatures fails, the planet will continue heating up at unacceptably high rates with a slew of adverse consequences hitting mankind.

Related: Aramco’s Mega Debt Deal Is A Raging Success

The report’s finding will undoubtedly serve as yet another argument for activist investors in the energy industry to use as a tool to pressure the companies in their sights into doing more to reduce their carbon footprint.

Speaking of carbon, Global Witness also takes aim at carbon capture and storage technologies that the energy industry has been using to varying degrees as a means of reducing the abovementioned footprint. According to Global Witness, it’s pretty pointless: a lot of the carbon captured currently in the industry is used in the extraction of more oil and gas, which clearly goes against the environmental grain.

However, the organization notes there may be something good in carbon capture and removal… if it is done on a much larger scale. Whether such a scale of utilization for the technology is possible remains to be seen, which is why Global Witness is not counting on it as a reliable way to advance the Paris Agreement goals.

The energy industry could hardly be counted on to take things into its own hands and voluntarily reduce its investment plans for new production. Whatever the climate goals of governments, the world’s population is growing and with it demand for energy. For now, energy comes mainly from oil and gas, and coal as well, in many poorer parts of the world. Renewables have yet to become competitive everywhere.

But there is a silver lining. If governments manage to find a way to press energy companies into reducing their spending programs especially on new production, they will have to. Oil and gas prices will rise sharply as a result—demand for energy is blind to the source of that energy—and renewables will become more appealing in places where oil and gas are still cheaper.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment
  • Peter B on April 28 2019 said:
    The world will not reduce the use of oil, gas and coal. These fuels are essential to our economies and any attempt to phase them out will only cause more problems.
  • Dave Lewis on April 28 2019 said:
    If oil and gas prices rise dramatically as the article says, wont that be very hard on poor people and seniors on fixed incomes.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News