[ad_1]
Countries have less than three years to reduce the rise of planet-heating carbon emissions and less than a decade to cut them almost in half to ensure a ‘liveable future’.
According to Carbon Tracker, the credibility of climate commitments made by global energy giants is low because they rely on expensive technologies that have not been proven at scale.
The non-profit think tank that studies the impact of climate change on financial markets observed that, despite several new targets being set by the top 15 energy companies worldwide, most of them are not agreeing to a total reduction in emissions.
It discovered that only four of the companies have pledged to reduce the emission from the use of their products such as gasoline consumption in cars.
Only four people have set 2030. reduction targetsThese are essential in driving rapid progress and evaluating developments.
“Setting appropriate targets is just the first step,” said Carbon Tracker 2022 reportInformation about the energy industry
“The approach to achieving emissions reductions must be credible to ensure that both stated reductions occur and that shareholders’ exposure to transition risks are not increased,” it added.
The group developed a set criteria based on how energy companies intend to achieve emissions reductions. They concluded that winding down existing assets was the best way to reduce climate risk and to protect investors.
Although the report criticized asset divestment for reducing the carbon footprint of the selling company, in reality, pollution is often just transferred to the new owner, who may even operate them in less responsible ways.
Countries have less than three years to reduce the rise of planet-heating carbon emissions, and less than a decade to cut them almost in half to ensure a “liveable future”, according to a Recently published UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report (IPCC)..
Nearly 200 countries have agreed to the adoption Glasgow Climate PactLast November, 26th Conference of the Parties in Scotland (COP). Countries Committed to a Climate DealTo reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to stop planetary heating exceeding 1.5C (2.7F).
The agreement It was criticised for failing to set higher goals.To combat rising temperatures. An increase in temperature above 1.5C (2.7F), could lead to climate catastrophes. This could include extreme high sea levels and wildfires that have been rising over the past few years.
Scientists say current emissions are putting humanity on track for a 3.2C (5.8F!) increase in temperature by the end century.
Carbon Tracker also observed that some funds from asset sales are reinvested into new oil production and gas production by energy firms.
The report criticised undue dependency on emissions mitigation technologies (EMTs), which can reduce emissions and continue to invest in new production.
“The level of achievable emissions reductions from such technologies remains uncertain, their deployment should be reserved for the hardest to abate sectors rather than being squandered on ‘creating space’ for oil and gas production that can be readily substituted by renewables,” it said.
All 15 companies except one plan to use EMTs.
Third-party offsets don’t always result in net reductions. However, some projects to plant or restore forests may have occurred anyway, it said.
Additionally, to offset energy emissions, huge amounts of land would be required, which could degrade other land uses.
At the top of Carbon Tracker’s ranking is Italian firm Eni, which targets a 35-percent reduction by 2030, taking into account all of its production as well as downstream use of third-party crude.
ExxonMobil USA, the largest US company, is at the bottom. However, it has set a 2050 netzero goal for its operations and not its products.
