The Great Barrier Reef is currently experiencing its hottest year in 400 years, July remains extremely warm and the Antarctic is also seeing extremely high temperatures – in the midst of winter. One of the reasons for this is the burning of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, oil and gas companies worldwide continue to rake in high profits and pay their shareholders tens of billions of US dollars instead of investing the money in the energy transition. And many countries are awarding hundreds of new drilling permits, as Nico Beckert has analyzed for you.
Alongside the usual suspects, such as the United States, Russia and Norway, Senegal is also expanding its oil production. Off its coast, the 5 billion dollar “Sangomar” project is set to boost the country’s economy and ensure prosperity. In parallel, the country promises a transition to green structures with the Partnership for a Just Energy Transition (JETP) and billions in aid. Samuel Ajala has looked into how this fits together.
Moreover, find out why the “Last Generation” in Austria is disbanding, how the groundwater level in Europe is doing, how cheap electricity from photovoltaics and battery storage already is, and how companies working for the common good can receive funding in Germany.
The latest quarterly figures of the largest oil and gas companies show how far apart political goals and economic reality are: At the last World Climate Conference, countries agreed to “transition away from fossil fuels in the energy system.” However, oil and gas companies are once again reporting high profits in the first half of 2024. They are paying out tens of billions of US dollars to their shareholders instead of investing the money in the energy transition. A significant reduction in oil and gas production is not in sight, as countries such as the United States, Russia, Norway and Brazil are awarding hundreds of new drilling licenses.
According to the think tank International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the United States, Canada, Australia, Norway and the UK accounted for two-thirds of all new oil and gas drilling licenses since 2020. Although these licenses are often for smaller deposits, they would emit several hundred million tonnes of CO2 if fully exploited. The same applies to the new drilling licenses awarded by Russia, Brazil, Mozambique, Egypt and Angola, as new data shows. Combined, the new licenses could lead to almost two billion tons of additional carbon emissions.
As the IISD data shows, companies have spent over 26 billion dollars on “newly awarded exploration licenses” in the last twelve months. Western companies such as Shell, BP, and Equinor spent the most on exploration, with 4.8 billion dollars.
This means that the age of oil and gas will not come to an end any time soon. According to the latest International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts, global oil demand will reach 106 million barrels annually by 2030, 3.2 million barrels higher than today. Supply is expected to increase even faster. The IEA only expects demand to fall after that. Demand for gas is expected to remain at a high level for even longer.
This is good news for the balance sheets of the oil and gas multinationals. They are making high profits and driving up their own share prices through share buybacks:
While oil and gas companies are spending billions of dollars to artificially inflate their share prices, many of them have watered down their climate targets and cut back on green energy investments.
Senegal has launched the production of offshore oil with the “Sangomar Project.” The 5 billion dollar project by Australian company Woodside is intended to boost the country’s economy and make it less dependent on energy imports. However, it also calls Senegal’s climate action commitments into question. At the same time, the JETP energy partnership is intended to move the country toward renewables and gas.
Oil production in the Sangomar field began in June after four years of preparatory work. The field off the coast around 100 kilometers south of the capital Dakar is a deep-sea project and is estimated to hold 1.3 billion barrels of oil. The facility has a capacity of 100,000 barrels per day and the underwater infrastructure is designed for further expansion.
Meg O’Neill, CEO of Woodside, expects the Sangomar project to “generate shareholder value” as part of the production-sharing agreement. The state-owned oil company Petrosen holds an 18 percent stake in the project.
The beginning of oil production coincides with the restructuring of the country’s energy industry. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Senegal intends to switch its power generation from heavy fuel oil to natural gas. The goal is to reduce dependence on fuel imports and cut electricity costs and carbon emissions. According to the IEA 2023, energy policy is “at the heart of Senegal’s 2035 strategy for accelerating sustainable development and economic growth.”
In June last year, the country also signed a Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) with Germany, France and the European Union with the intention of increasing the share of renewable energies in the electricity mix to 40 percent by 2030. Renewables currently account for 16 percent of electricity production. Only 65 percent of the population has access to electricity and the country’s energy supply emissions stand at nine million tons of CO2. The country intends to present a long-term strategy for the development of emissions by the end of 2024. The donor countries have pledged to mobilize funding of 2.5 billion euros over three to five years for the partnership.
During a visit to Senegal in spring 2022, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz proposed that Germany could help with the expansion of offshore gas fields. The project was met with criticism, particularly from its government coalition partner, the Green Party, and the environmental movement. In the meantime, such cooperation has apparently fallen by the wayside and other partners are developing the project. According to a study, the country also has considerable potential for developing renewable energies and potentially green hydrogen for domestic use and export.
As a signatory to the Paris Agreement, Senegal has committed to cutting greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to a sustainable, low-carbon economy. However, experts fear new oil production could hinder the country’s commitment to net zero.
Souleymane Thiam, Project Development Coordinator at the NGO platform ONG Senegal, told Table.Briefings that the money from selling fossil fuels – including the country’s share of petroleum profits and taxes – could boost economic development. He also pointed to opportunities for local companies: “In 2019, Senegal introduced a law on ‘local content,’ which ensures the recruitment of local staff and companies.” This has generated a turnover of over 250 million dollars for local companies.
According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Senegal is one of the fastest-growing economies in sub-Saharan Africa, with growth rates of 8.3 percent for 2024 “due in part to an emerging oil and gas industry.” However, experts warn that the contribution of the oil and gas sector to GDP remains low at less than five percent. This means that even well-managed revenues from the sector could only contribute to the transformation of the economy to a small extent. And Senegal may even generate less income from oil and gas production than planned. The IEA’s World Energy Outlook predicts that a global transition to clean energy will reduce demand for oil and gas in the long term. This could lock the country “into an economic model that no longer works,” according to oil analyst and IPCC author Yamina Saheb.
Ndeye Fatou Sy, Program Manager at the NGO Lumière Sunergie pour le Développement (LSD Senegal), told Table.Briefings that the country is committed to the dynamics of the energy transition. Based on the “Gas to Power” strategy, Senegal relies on natural gas as a “transition fuel” to meet its energy needs and emission reduction targets by 2030.
It is also about “economic justice” because the countries of the South only have a minor contribution to climate change compared to the developed countries. “This is why the previous government defended its decision to utilize oil and gas resources very early on to meet the country’s energy needs.”
As part of the JETP, Senegal also proposed generating electricity from gas. This would also cause problems for climate action, as the companies would flare the gas and emit methane. “The challenge for the country will be to learn from examples such as Nigeria so that it does not end up in the same situation.” Despite the JETP with Europe, Senegal has exported its first shipment of crude oil to the Netherlands and Germany. And the JETP also leaves questions unanswered: “The JETP is in the process of being finalized with the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy and Mines. However, the JETP concept ‘fair’ lacks concreteness and is not yet clearly defined where it is aimed.”
Fatou Sy believes that President Diomaye Faye’s current government has only started working on an energy transition program. However, the President has committed to setting up a National Strategy of Ecological Transition towards Sustainable Development (SNTEDD) and a national fund for the promotion of the green economy (FNPEV).
“Unfortunately, the debate on a just energy transition has not yet been taken up by the general public, apart from social actors and the affected communities. The side effects of oil and gas extraction are of greater interest to the majority of people,” says Sy.
The Last Generation in Austria has stopped its protests and is disbanding. As a movement, it is “no longer possible to achieve political change,” spokesperson Afra Porsche told Table.Briefings. This is why the decision had been on the table for some time. Porsche criticizes the criminalization of the protests as “irresponsible,” – but she also criticizes “ignorant politicians” and the population, who have relied too much on “the Last Generation to get off their asses and do something.”
However, the end of the campaign does not mean that Austria will not see any more climate protests in the future – but under a new name. “We are making room for something new to emerge,” the Last Generation announced on Tuesday. Although the movement was never intended to be a long-term project, as Porsche says, there is still a “certain helplessness and horror that the last people who tried something are giving up.” Part of the leadership team had already resigned in November 2023 due to strategic differences. However, Porsche explained that this was not the reason for the disbandment.
The remaining financial resources will now be used to cover the costs of the numerous lawsuits against members of the Last Generation. Individual activists would have to pay tens of thousands of euros. dpa/lb
On July 17, Table.Briefings reported on a position paper calling for the EU combustion compromise for 2035 to be overturned. Unfortunately, the findings of the authors, led by combustion engine expert Thomas Koch, do not stand up to critical scrutiny.
Koch and his colleagues argue that the emissions of battery electric vehicles are actually much higher than assumed by science and the EU. To reach this conclusion, Koch’s team makes two inadmissible simplifications. Firstly, Koch’s group suggests that the additional demand for electricity for the production and operation of electric vehicles will be met with fossil fuels. Secondly, the authors of the position paper reveal a lack of understanding of how the various parts of EU climate regulation work and interact.
The position paper uses a so-called marginal approach to calculate the CO2 emissions of the electricity used. This approach assumes that for every electric vehicle that is built or charged, a coal or gas-fired power plant generates additional electricity. This assumption is misleading because it ignores the energy transition that is already taking place and the plans of the electricity industry.
In fact, grid operators and energy providers are already planning for the expected demand for electricity from EVs (see ENTSOE energy demand forecast, for example). As a result, the expansion of renewable energies is dimensioned in such a way that the power plant capacities can supply the electricity required by the EV fleet. In addition, EVs often charge at times when there is a lot of renewable electricity in the grid (e.g. at night or at lunchtime at work). This grid-friendly charging will be further improved in the future through innovative charging and grid management.
Instead of the marginal approach used by Koch’s group, the average electricity mix of a country or region should be used to calculate the emissions intensity of the production and operation of an EV.
Using this method, T&E’s modeling shows that a mid-size electric vehicle produced and charged with the average EU electricity mix would emit 75 gCO2/km over its lifetime if purchased in 2022 and 46 gCO2/km if purchased in 2030. Studies by the ICCT and the IEA come to similar conclusions. The values of 157 gCO2/km calculated in the position paper are therefore many times off the mark.
In addition to these incorrect calculation bases, the position paper makes a serious mistake in its understanding of the regulatory logic of EU climate legislation. The paper suggests that the “real” emissions of EVs are significantly higher because only the emissions at the vehicle’s tailpipe are included in the calculation. As EVs do not cause any emissions when driving, but the electricity produced does, depending on the source of electricity, this is an unacceptable advantage for e-mobility. What appears plausible at first glance fails to take into account how climate action works in Europe.
There is a good reason why the methodology of the fleet limit values adopted by the EU only takes into account direct tailpipe emissions: Because the manufacturers of the vehicles are the subject of regulation, only what the car manufacturers themselves can directly influence can be regulated. Emissions from upstream sectors such as electricity generation are explicitly addressed by other regulations (e.g. EU emissions trading). It is precisely the interplay of different regulations within the Green Deal that should ensure that Europe achieves the goal of CO2 neutrality.
The EU combustion compromise for 2035 is the most important measure for reducing traffic emissions. If Europe wants to defend its leading position in the automotive industry, we need proposals on how to promote e-mobility made in Europe and not methodically questionable sham debates about the combustion engine technology of the past.
Sebastian Bock is Managing Director of the environmental umbrella organization Transport & Environment Germany.
The Great Barrier Reef is currently experiencing its hottest year in 400 years, July remains extremely warm and the Antarctic is also seeing extremely high temperatures – in the midst of winter. One of the reasons for this is the burning of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, oil and gas companies worldwide continue to rake in high profits and pay their shareholders tens of billions of US dollars instead of investing the money in the energy transition. And many countries are awarding hundreds of new drilling permits, as Nico Beckert has analyzed for you.
Alongside the usual suspects, such as the United States, Russia and Norway, Senegal is also expanding its oil production. Off its coast, the 5 billion dollar “Sangomar” project is set to boost the country’s economy and ensure prosperity. In parallel, the country promises a transition to green structures with the Partnership for a Just Energy Transition (JETP) and billions in aid. Samuel Ajala has looked into how this fits together.
Moreover, find out why the “Last Generation” in Austria is disbanding, how the groundwater level in Europe is doing, how cheap electricity from photovoltaics and battery storage already is, and how companies working for the common good can receive funding in Germany.
The latest quarterly figures of the largest oil and gas companies show how far apart political goals and economic reality are: At the last World Climate Conference, countries agreed to “transition away from fossil fuels in the energy system.” However, oil and gas companies are once again reporting high profits in the first half of 2024. They are paying out tens of billions of US dollars to their shareholders instead of investing the money in the energy transition. A significant reduction in oil and gas production is not in sight, as countries such as the United States, Russia, Norway and Brazil are awarding hundreds of new drilling licenses.
According to the think tank International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the United States, Canada, Australia, Norway and the UK accounted for two-thirds of all new oil and gas drilling licenses since 2020. Although these licenses are often for smaller deposits, they would emit several hundred million tonnes of CO2 if fully exploited. The same applies to the new drilling licenses awarded by Russia, Brazil, Mozambique, Egypt and Angola, as new data shows. Combined, the new licenses could lead to almost two billion tons of additional carbon emissions.
As the IISD data shows, companies have spent over 26 billion dollars on “newly awarded exploration licenses” in the last twelve months. Western companies such as Shell, BP, and Equinor spent the most on exploration, with 4.8 billion dollars.
This means that the age of oil and gas will not come to an end any time soon. According to the latest International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts, global oil demand will reach 106 million barrels annually by 2030, 3.2 million barrels higher than today. Supply is expected to increase even faster. The IEA only expects demand to fall after that. Demand for gas is expected to remain at a high level for even longer.
This is good news for the balance sheets of the oil and gas multinationals. They are making high profits and driving up their own share prices through share buybacks:
While oil and gas companies are spending billions of dollars to artificially inflate their share prices, many of them have watered down their climate targets and cut back on green energy investments.
Senegal has launched the production of offshore oil with the “Sangomar Project.” The 5 billion dollar project by Australian company Woodside is intended to boost the country’s economy and make it less dependent on energy imports. However, it also calls Senegal’s climate action commitments into question. At the same time, the JETP energy partnership is intended to move the country toward renewables and gas.
Oil production in the Sangomar field began in June after four years of preparatory work. The field off the coast around 100 kilometers south of the capital Dakar is a deep-sea project and is estimated to hold 1.3 billion barrels of oil. The facility has a capacity of 100,000 barrels per day and the underwater infrastructure is designed for further expansion.
Meg O’Neill, CEO of Woodside, expects the Sangomar project to “generate shareholder value” as part of the production-sharing agreement. The state-owned oil company Petrosen holds an 18 percent stake in the project.
The beginning of oil production coincides with the restructuring of the country’s energy industry. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Senegal intends to switch its power generation from heavy fuel oil to natural gas. The goal is to reduce dependence on fuel imports and cut electricity costs and carbon emissions. According to the IEA 2023, energy policy is “at the heart of Senegal’s 2035 strategy for accelerating sustainable development and economic growth.”
In June last year, the country also signed a Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) with Germany, France and the European Union with the intention of increasing the share of renewable energies in the electricity mix to 40 percent by 2030. Renewables currently account for 16 percent of electricity production. Only 65 percent of the population has access to electricity and the country’s energy supply emissions stand at nine million tons of CO2. The country intends to present a long-term strategy for the development of emissions by the end of 2024. The donor countries have pledged to mobilize funding of 2.5 billion euros over three to five years for the partnership.
During a visit to Senegal in spring 2022, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz proposed that Germany could help with the expansion of offshore gas fields. The project was met with criticism, particularly from its government coalition partner, the Green Party, and the environmental movement. In the meantime, such cooperation has apparently fallen by the wayside and other partners are developing the project. According to a study, the country also has considerable potential for developing renewable energies and potentially green hydrogen for domestic use and export.
As a signatory to the Paris Agreement, Senegal has committed to cutting greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to a sustainable, low-carbon economy. However, experts fear new oil production could hinder the country’s commitment to net zero.
Souleymane Thiam, Project Development Coordinator at the NGO platform ONG Senegal, told Table.Briefings that the money from selling fossil fuels – including the country’s share of petroleum profits and taxes – could boost economic development. He also pointed to opportunities for local companies: “In 2019, Senegal introduced a law on ‘local content,’ which ensures the recruitment of local staff and companies.” This has generated a turnover of over 250 million dollars for local companies.
According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Senegal is one of the fastest-growing economies in sub-Saharan Africa, with growth rates of 8.3 percent for 2024 “due in part to an emerging oil and gas industry.” However, experts warn that the contribution of the oil and gas sector to GDP remains low at less than five percent. This means that even well-managed revenues from the sector could only contribute to the transformation of the economy to a small extent. And Senegal may even generate less income from oil and gas production than planned. The IEA’s World Energy Outlook predicts that a global transition to clean energy will reduce demand for oil and gas in the long term. This could lock the country “into an economic model that no longer works,” according to oil analyst and IPCC author Yamina Saheb.
Ndeye Fatou Sy, Program Manager at the NGO Lumière Sunergie pour le Développement (LSD Senegal), told Table.Briefings that the country is committed to the dynamics of the energy transition. Based on the “Gas to Power” strategy, Senegal relies on natural gas as a “transition fuel” to meet its energy needs and emission reduction targets by 2030.
It is also about “economic justice” because the countries of the South only have a minor contribution to climate change compared to the developed countries. “This is why the previous government defended its decision to utilize oil and gas resources very early on to meet the country’s energy needs.”
As part of the JETP, Senegal also proposed generating electricity from gas. This would also cause problems for climate action, as the companies would flare the gas and emit methane. “The challenge for the country will be to learn from examples such as Nigeria so that it does not end up in the same situation.” Despite the JETP with Europe, Senegal has exported its first shipment of crude oil to the Netherlands and Germany. And the JETP also leaves questions unanswered: “The JETP is in the process of being finalized with the Ministry of Petroleum, Energy and Mines. However, the JETP concept ‘fair’ lacks concreteness and is not yet clearly defined where it is aimed.”
Fatou Sy believes that President Diomaye Faye’s current government has only started working on an energy transition program. However, the President has committed to setting up a National Strategy of Ecological Transition towards Sustainable Development (SNTEDD) and a national fund for the promotion of the green economy (FNPEV).
“Unfortunately, the debate on a just energy transition has not yet been taken up by the general public, apart from social actors and the affected communities. The side effects of oil and gas extraction are of greater interest to the majority of people,” says Sy.
The Last Generation in Austria has stopped its protests and is disbanding. As a movement, it is “no longer possible to achieve political change,” spokesperson Afra Porsche told Table.Briefings. This is why the decision had been on the table for some time. Porsche criticizes the criminalization of the protests as “irresponsible,” – but she also criticizes “ignorant politicians” and the population, who have relied too much on “the Last Generation to get off their asses and do something.”
However, the end of the campaign does not mean that Austria will not see any more climate protests in the future – but under a new name. “We are making room for something new to emerge,” the Last Generation announced on Tuesday. Although the movement was never intended to be a long-term project, as Porsche says, there is still a “certain helplessness and horror that the last people who tried something are giving up.” Part of the leadership team had already resigned in November 2023 due to strategic differences. However, Porsche explained that this was not the reason for the disbandment.
The remaining financial resources will now be used to cover the costs of the numerous lawsuits against members of the Last Generation. Individual activists would have to pay tens of thousands of euros. dpa/lb
On July 17, Table.Briefings reported on a position paper calling for the EU combustion compromise for 2035 to be overturned. Unfortunately, the findings of the authors, led by combustion engine expert Thomas Koch, do not stand up to critical scrutiny.
Koch and his colleagues argue that the emissions of battery electric vehicles are actually much higher than assumed by science and the EU. To reach this conclusion, Koch’s team makes two inadmissible simplifications. Firstly, Koch’s group suggests that the additional demand for electricity for the production and operation of electric vehicles will be met with fossil fuels. Secondly, the authors of the position paper reveal a lack of understanding of how the various parts of EU climate regulation work and interact.
The position paper uses a so-called marginal approach to calculate the CO2 emissions of the electricity used. This approach assumes that for every electric vehicle that is built or charged, a coal or gas-fired power plant generates additional electricity. This assumption is misleading because it ignores the energy transition that is already taking place and the plans of the electricity industry.
In fact, grid operators and energy providers are already planning for the expected demand for electricity from EVs (see ENTSOE energy demand forecast, for example). As a result, the expansion of renewable energies is dimensioned in such a way that the power plant capacities can supply the electricity required by the EV fleet. In addition, EVs often charge at times when there is a lot of renewable electricity in the grid (e.g. at night or at lunchtime at work). This grid-friendly charging will be further improved in the future through innovative charging and grid management.
Instead of the marginal approach used by Koch’s group, the average electricity mix of a country or region should be used to calculate the emissions intensity of the production and operation of an EV.
Using this method, T&E’s modeling shows that a mid-size electric vehicle produced and charged with the average EU electricity mix would emit 75 gCO2/km over its lifetime if purchased in 2022 and 46 gCO2/km if purchased in 2030. Studies by the ICCT and the IEA come to similar conclusions. The values of 157 gCO2/km calculated in the position paper are therefore many times off the mark.
In addition to these incorrect calculation bases, the position paper makes a serious mistake in its understanding of the regulatory logic of EU climate legislation. The paper suggests that the “real” emissions of EVs are significantly higher because only the emissions at the vehicle’s tailpipe are included in the calculation. As EVs do not cause any emissions when driving, but the electricity produced does, depending on the source of electricity, this is an unacceptable advantage for e-mobility. What appears plausible at first glance fails to take into account how climate action works in Europe.
There is a good reason why the methodology of the fleet limit values adopted by the EU only takes into account direct tailpipe emissions: Because the manufacturers of the vehicles are the subject of regulation, only what the car manufacturers themselves can directly influence can be regulated. Emissions from upstream sectors such as electricity generation are explicitly addressed by other regulations (e.g. EU emissions trading). It is precisely the interplay of different regulations within the Green Deal that should ensure that Europe achieves the goal of CO2 neutrality.
The EU combustion compromise for 2035 is the most important measure for reducing traffic emissions. If Europe wants to defend its leading position in the automotive industry, we need proposals on how to promote e-mobility made in Europe and not methodically questionable sham debates about the combustion engine technology of the past.
Sebastian Bock is Managing Director of the environmental umbrella organization Transport & Environment Germany.
