Banning New Fossil Fuel Projects Is The Way To Go

Stopping new fossil fuel projects is key to achieving climate goals, as current infrastructure is sufficient to meet energy demands in a 1.5°C world

One of the questions I receive the most when I talk about carbon emissions is, why they are still approving new fossil fuels projects? Doesn’t that take us backward? Isn’t reducing emissions while allowing new projects to continue is like bailing out water from a boat with too many holes? (Spoiler: yes it is)

But luckily, we are not the only ones wondering about this. Once again, science offers insightful answers.

A recent paper by Dr. Fergus Green and colleagues published in Science compellingly argues for halting the development of new fossil fuel projects. The study explains that the continued expansion of fossil fuel production and use undermines current global efforts to meet the Paris Agreement goals.

Fortunately, the authors propose an alternative: stop the approval of new fossil fuel extraction and power generation projects. I know, wild, right? But why do they think that’s the way to go?

The paper’s core argument is simple yet powerful: the world does not need new fossil fuel projects to meet its energy demands and climate targets. Even if some organizations insist otherwise.

After a rigorous study evaluating all sorts of data, the authors concluded that existing fossil fuel infrastructure is sufficient to supply the energy needed in a scenario where global warming is limited to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The researchers analyzed various scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report. They found that existing oil, gas, and coal projects are adequate to meet future energy needs as we transition to cleaner sources.

That is, we don’t need anymore.

Not. A. Single. One.

Great Minds Think Alike

Actually, Green et al are not the only ones to reach the same conclusion. The International Energy Agency (IEA) states in clearly its 2023 report that no new fossil fuel extraction projects are necessary to transition to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a pivotal finding because it challenges the narrative some governments and industry players have pushed, without empirical data to support it, that new projects are essential during the transition to clean energy.

One of the study’s strengths, and possibly something that will make many cringe, is its analysis of the economic, political, and legal aspects of stopping new fossil fuel projects: The authors argue that preventing new projects is easier than closing existing ones.

Once a fossil fuel project is operational, significant capital has already been invested, and the economic interests of the firms involved lie in continuing operations for as long as possible (i.e. until resources run out) to recoup these investments. This creates what is known as “infrastructure lock-in,” making it more challenging to shut down existing projects.

Additionally, from a political perspective, firms and trade unions tend to lobby more intensely against regulations that threaten existing jobs and investments than against those that affect hypothetical future projects. Legislators also find it more politically feasible to impose stringent regulations on new entrants to the market rather than incumbents. Indeed, changing a license after it’s already been issued can often be almost legally impossible.

In addition, legal barriers exist to closing existing projects, especially those involving foreign investors who can use international trade and investment treaties to protect their interests. However, decisions to approve or reject new projects are typically unrestricted in this way. Even more, they are usually scrutinized closely.

The authors go further than that, though, and propose establishing a global norm against new fossil fuel projects. But there’s a precedent that this could indeed work. Historical shifts in social and moral norms, such as the abolition of slavery and the ban on nuclear weapons testing, show that committed or activist groups can drive significant change by highlighting the harms of certain practices and mobilizing support for bans.

On top of that, a norm against new fossil fuel projects could gain traction through the efforts of governments and civil society organizations. Never underestimate the power of well-organized people with good intentions!

Luckily, elements of this norm are already emerging. For instance, the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) and the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) have members who have agreed to stop issuing new licenses for oil and gas exploration and new coal power stations, respectively. The UN Secretary-General has also called on countries to stop new fossil fuel projects. The study argues that a “No New Fossil” norm can be institutionalized by building on these efforts, making it easier to phase out fossil fuels and achieve the Paris Agreement goals.

It is not common for scientists to provide a legal roadmap for a solution, so I’m very impressed with the authors’ findings.

I just met with a group of #ClimateAction leaders from civil society around the world.

In every country, without exception, civil society must be at the table helping to shape policy, and on the ground helping to deliver change. pic.twitter.com/YaoKpH8OaI

— António Guterres (@antonioguterres) June 15, 2023

Adopting a “No New Fossil” policy would send a clear message about the dangers and counterproductiveness of new fossil fuel projects and focus policy efforts on expanding renewable energy investments instead. This approach could also help manage the decline of existing fossil fuel infrastructure in a just and equitable way. A win-win scenario, indeed.

Dr. Fergus Green from UCL highlights the clarity of this norm, stating, “Complex, long-term goals like ‘net zero emissions by 2050’ lack these features, but ‘no new fossil fuel projects’ is a clear and immediate demand, against which all current governments, and the fossil fuel industry, can rightly be judged. It should serve as a litmus test of whether a government is serious about tackling climate change: if they’re allowing new fossil fuel projects, then they’re not serious.”

Co-author Dr. Steve Pye from UCL’s Energy Institute adds, “Importantly, our research establishes that there is a rigorous scientific basis for the proposed norm by showing that there is no need for new fossil fuel projects. The clarity that this norm brings should help focus policy on targeting the required ambitious scaling of renewable and clean energy investment while managing the decline of fossil fuel infrastructure in an equitable and just way.”

So, to those who were wondering and for whom I didn’t have a clear answer until now — the case for halting new fossil fuel projects is indeed clear and supported by robust scientific evidence. Governments can make significant progress toward meeting their climate commitments by focusing on this easily achievable and straightforward goal. Establishing a norm against new fossil fuel projects aligns with the scientific consensus and data and, greatly simplifies the pathway to a sustainable energy future.

As Dr. Fergus Green and his colleagues have shown, this approach is not only necessary but also feasible and impactful. By committing to no new fossil fuel projects, we can take a critical step toward safeguarding our planet for future generations. What I love the most about when people unite for a cause that matters is how creative we can be. Sometimes, the simpler path is the one that will take us further.