To limit the long-term rise in global temperatures to 1.5°C, it said governments and industry must wean themselves off fossil fuels ASAP, push for energy efficiency in all walks of life, and invest trillions in renewable energy.

Coming from the Paris-based IEA, an intergovernmental body founded in the wake of the 1973/74 OPEC oil embargo to assure global energy supply, the report turned heads. Overseen by the energy ministers of 30 major economies, the IEA has generally defended fossil-fuel interests. But with most countries missing their emission-reduction targets and catastrophe looming, the IEA finally picked a side.

“This gap between rhetoric and action needs to close,” said IEA executive director Fatih Birol. “Doing so requires nothing short of a total transformation of the energy systems that underpin our economies.”

Nine days later, on May 26, calls to close that gap came fast and furious. Chevron shareholders voted 61% in favour of an activist proposal asking the oil company to cut its total greenhouse gas emissions, including those coming out of customers’ tailpipes, emissions known as Scope 3.

That same day, at least two ExxonMobil board members were unseated in a bid to, as Reuters put it, “force the company’s leadership to reckon with the risk of failing to adjust its business strategy to match global efforts to combat climate change.”

Eli Kasargod-Staub, the executive director of Majority Action, a shareholder group, told The Guardian, “For the first time in history, responsible shareholders have breached the walls protecting recalcitrant boards of directors.”

Also that day, a Dutch court ordered Shell to reduce its GHGs by 45% by 2030, based on 2019 levels, after determining that Shell’s climate plans were inadequate. Pundits began calling it Black Wednesday and ‘a day of reckoning’ for Big Oil as courtrooms and boardrooms turned on industry.

“For the first time in history, responsible shareholders have breached the walls protecting recalcitrant boards of directors.”

-Eli Kasargod-Staub, executive director of Majority Action

“This is a monumental victory for our planet, for our children and a big leap towards a livable future for everyone,” said Donald Pols, director of Friends of the Earth Netherlands.

Though Royal Dutch Shell said it will appeal the ruling, more good news was announced May 26: Canada’s largest oil company, Suncor, committed to going net-zero by 2050, adding it would slash emissions across its value chain by a third by 2030.

Luckily, the IEA’s report, Net Zero by 2050, “shows that there are still pathways to reach net-zero by 2050,” said Birol. He called the IEA’s prescribed course “the most technically feasible, cost‐effective and socially acceptable. Even so, that pathway remains narrow and extremely challenging, requiring all stakeholders – governments, businesses, investors and citizens – to take action this year and every year after.”

The report sets out 400 milestones necessary to achieve net-zero by 2050. Most important: ensuring that developing economies receive financing and technological aid to build their energy systems equitably and sustainably. Birol insists that a world powered by clean electricity means huge opportunities, “with the potential to create millions of new jobs and boost economic growth.”

“Big Oil and Gas has just lost a very powerful shield,” summed up David Tong, a senior campaigner with Washington, D.C.’s Oil Change International.

But the IEA’s shift doesn’t mean the path to 2050 will be smooth. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers dismissed the report as “unrealistic.” Alberta Energy Minister Sonya Savage predicted Alberta’s fossil-fuel sector “will continue to grow and thrive.” Large emitting countries such as Japan, Australia and the Philippines bucked the proposed ban on new development, claiming natural gas, oil and in some cases even coal still have roles to play.

It doesn’t help that the IEA has been sending out mixed messages. Weeks after the release, as OilPrice.com pointed out, “the agency called on OPEC+ to increase production as demand for oil rebounded faster and stronger than the agency had apparently expected.” By July, benchmark crude oil prices had surged to multi-year highs after a breakdown in negotiations with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

In its July oil market report, the IEA cautioned  that “while prices at these levels could increase the pace of electrification of the transport sector and help accelerate energy transitions, they could also put a drag on the economic recovery.” It added, “Volatility does not help ensure orderly and secure energy transitions.”

Meanwhile, back in Canada, oil industry advocates continue to suggest that the sector should be positioning itself to capitalize on the next oil boom. However, in a report released last month, Jeffrey Craig of Veritas Investment Research said, “Given the pressure to both cut emissions and invest in renewable energy, we expect the super majors to shed mostly upstream oil and gas assets [in the oil sands] to fund investments into renewables.”

Right on cue, when BP slashed its long-term oil price outlook in late June, the company’s oil sands investments were rendered “worthless,” Reuters reports. The fate of those stranded assets remains to be seen.

South of the border, oil majors are feeling the heat this week as Democratic senators proposed a climate pollution tax that could cost Exxon, Chevron and other big emitters billions annually while establishing a “Polluters Pay Climate Fund.” The draft bill could see US$500 billion raised over 10 years to be used toward investments in communities facing fossil-fuel-driven climate impacts, including extreme flooding, rising sea levels and a more severe wildfire season.

Corporate Knights director of research Ralph Torrie points out that “the smart money and long-game investors” have been pivoting from fossils to renewables for years. “If the IEA can get out in front of that parade, it can only help.” Torrie suggests that the right question to be asking is not “What will happen?” but “What must happen?” if we are to avert truly dangerous climate change.

While new technologies may help power the transition, he credits the agency for seeing energy efficiency as a resource: “We must thread the eye of a needle here, and there is only time now for one attempt at it.”

A version of this story appeared in the Summer Issue of Corporate Knights magazine.

The post Big Oil’s no-good, very-bad week continues appeared first on Corporate Knights.

No one disputes that there will be vestigial demand for fossil fuels for decades to come. No one disputes that low oil prices would severely damage the oil sands. No one disputes that it will be decades before the transition to electrified transport is complete. But does the transition to EVs need to be complete before it contributes to chronically low oil prices? Importantly, what will the oil supply-demand balance look like later in this decade, and in future decades? Will prices be high enough to sustain one of the more expensive sources of oil? No one will dispute that someday EVs will threaten oil demand and thus prices.

Today, annual EV sales data are used to assess and dismiss the threat. Looking at annual sales data suggests the risk to the sector is years away – but that is looking at where the puck is, not where it will be.

Looking only at annual EV sales data means failing to recognize that once an EV enters service, it remains in use for a decade or more. Every fossil-fuelled vehicle displaced by an EV permanently removes oil demand for that vehicle. Cumulative EVs is the critical factor, not annual sales. Specifically, how many EVs are required to impact crude oil prices? And when might that occur? Is it decades into the future? Or is it imminent? How much does a small drop in oil demand affect price?

A 2% oil-supply surplus caused a 70% drop in oil prices between 2014 and 2015. That surplus was primarily due to Saudi Arabia flooding the market with crude oil. They are doing the same thing today, which, compounded by COVID-19, is causing acute problems. Electrification of transport is chronic, however, and its effect on oil prices will increase over time until a transition is virtually complete.

So how many EVs could cause a small oil-supply surplus? A report published by the Bowman Centre for Sustainable Energy suggests the answer: about 40 million EVs worldwide. And, disruptively, it could happen by mid-decade.

So, what to do?

First, we need to recognize the severity of problems facing the oil-producing provinces. Jobs are disappearing, and companies are under financial stress, leading to ripple effects across their economies and attendant social problems. These challenges are being imposed on Canada by global forces; our government leaders cannot change this global shift, regardless of political rhetoric.

Oil-producing provinces, the federal government and Canadians need to develop and implement a transition plan. An action plan designed for oil-sector workers and society at large. A plan that positions the oil sands as a resource that contributes to society and our economy as the 21^st century unfolds.

A detailed, equitable, data-driven and realistic transition plan will recognize the value of bitumen for non-fuel uses. In addition, such a plan will embrace electrification of transport as an opportunity. Visionary, courageous and cooperative leadership is required to drive technical and social solutions to ensure that the provinces, citizens and Canada build back better.

What happens if we are wrong? Nothing – there is no downside. Implementing a transition plan will create jobs and wealth in addition to those in a scenario where the oil sands prosper as in the past.

Ed Brost is a professional chemical engineer with over 35 years experience in the energy sector with Shell, Ontario Hydro and Atomic Energy of Canada. Ed is currently managing director of Innovation and Sustainable Development with Carbovate Development Corp. and volunteers his time as an associate with a non-profit, the Bowman Centre for Sustainable Energy.

The post Even our least electrifying politicians can’t stop what is coming appeared first on Corporate Knights.