Limiting the global average temperature rise to 1.5 °C requires an unprecedented reduction in fossil fuel use, along with large-scale deployment of CO2 capture and storage. To track the fossil fuel industry and companies against 1.5 °C-consistent pathways, we propose a new methodology that complements existing methodologies in four main ways: (1) it uses publicly available data; (2) focuses on absolute fossil fuel production (as a proxy for embedded emissions) rather than carbon intensities associated with their use; (3) includes coal that is commonly excluded; and (4) is applicable regardless of whether the company has set a target. By applying this method, we evaluated the 142 largest producers of coal, oil and gas against three 1.5 °C IPCC Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSP1-1.9, SSP2-1.9 and SSP5-1.9) from 2014 and the International Energy Agency’s Net Zero Emissions pathway from 2020. Between 2014 and 2020, 64%, 63% and 70% of coal, oil and gas companies, respectively, produced more than their production budgets under the IPCC’s middle-of-the-road (SSP2-1.9) Paris Agreement-compliant scenario. In addition, if the 142 companies we examined continued their average growth rate trends from 2010 to 2018, they would produce up to 68%, 42% and 53% more than their cumulative production budgets for coal, oil and gas, respectively, by 2050. By providing such simple metrics, based on publicly available data, our method offers stakeholders a way of easily tracking and comparing the performance of different fossil fuel producers against climate goals.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
All code that support the findings in this study are available through UQ eSpace at https://doi.org/10.48610/1357886.
McGlade, C. & Ekins, P. The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 517, 187–190 (2015).
Welsby, D., Price, J., Pye, S. & Ekins, P. Unextractable fossil fuels in a 1.5 °C world. Nature 597, 230–234 (2021).
Trout, K. et al. Existing fossil fuel extraction would warm the world beyond 1.5 °C. Environ. Res. Lett. 17, 064010 (2022).
Kühne, K., Bartsch, N., Tate, R. D., Higson, J. & Habet, A. “Carbon Bombs” – mapping key fossil fuel projects. Energy Policy 166, 112950 (2022).
Global Coal to Clean Power Transition Statement (UN Climate Change Conference, 2021); https://ukcop26.org/global-coal-to-clean-power-transition-statement/
Hausfather, Z. & Moore, F. Net-zero commitments could limit warming to below 2 °C. Nat. Clim. Change 604, 247–248 (2022).
Wright, C. & Nyberg, D. An inconvenient truth: how organizations translate climate change into business as usual. Acad. Manage. J. 60, 1633–1661 (2017).
Kuramochi, T. et al. Beyond national climate action: the impact of region, city, and business commitments on global greenhouse gas emissions. Clim. Policy 20, 275–291 (2020).
Rohleder, M., Wilkens, M. & Zink, J. The effects of mutual fund decarbonisation on stock prices and carbon emissions. J. Bank. Financ. 134, 106352 (2022).
Dietz, S., Gardiner, D., Jahn, V. & Noels, J. How ambitious are oil and gas companies’ climate goals? Science 374, 405–408 (2021).
Hadziosmanovic, M. et al. Using cumulative carbon budgets and corporate carbon disclosure to inform ambitious corporate emissions targets and long‐term mitigation pathways. J. Ind. Ecol. 26, 1747–1759 (2022).
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Article 3, section 1 (United Nations, 1992); https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf
Pauw, P., Mbeva, K. & van Asselt, H. Subtle differentiation of countries’ responsibilities under the Paris Agreement. Palgrave Commun. 5, 86 (2019).
Rekker, S., Ives, M. C., Wade, B., Webb, L. & Greig, C. Measuring corporate Paris Compliance using a strict science-based approach. Nat. Commun. 13, 4441 (2022).
Krabbe, O. et al. Aligning corporate greenhouse-gas emissions targets with climate goals. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 1057–1060 (2015).
Guidance on Setting Science-based Targets for Oil, Gas and Integrated Energy companies (Science Based Targets, 2021); https://sciencebasedtargets.org/resources/legacy/2020/08/OG-Guidance.pdf
Rekker, S., O’Brien, K., Humphrey, J. & Pascale, A. Comparing extraction rates of fossil fuel producers against global climate goals. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 489–492 (2018).
Heede, R. Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers 1854–2010. Clim. Change 122, 229–241 (2014).
Absolute Impact 2021: Why Oil and Gas ‘Net Zero’ Ambitions are Not Enough (Carbon Tracker, 2021); https://carbontracker.org/reports/absolute-impact-2021/
How We Defeated Shell: Milieudefensie et al. v. Royal Dutch Shell PLC – A Peek Behind the Scenes (Milieudefensie, 2021).
Cox, R. & Reij, M. Defending the Danger Line: A Manual for Climate Litigators: Using the Law as Climate Action Tool to Achieve the Paris Temperature Goal (Paulussen Advocaten & Milieudefensie, 2022).
Heede, R. & Oreskes, N. Potential emissions of CO2 and methane from proved reserves of fossil fuels: an alternative analysis. Glob. Environ. Change 36, 12–20 (2016).
Statistical Review of World Energy 70th edn (BP, 2021); https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2021-full-report.pdf
Fuss, S. et al. Betting on negative emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 850–853 (2014).
Brack, D. & King, R. Managing land-based CDR: BECCS, forests and carbon sequestration. Glob. Policy 12, 45–56 (2020).
Lane, J., Greig, C. & Garnett, A. Uncertain storage prospects create a conundrum for carbon capture and storage ambitions. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 925–936 (2021).
Anderson, K. & Peters, G. The trouble with negative emissions. Science 354, 182–183 (2016).
Howard, C. et al. Why we need a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. Lancet Planet. Health 6, e777–e778 (2022).
Rogelj, J. et al. Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °C. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 325–332 (2018).
Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector (International Energy Agency, 2021).
IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (WMO, 2018).
Tong, D. et al. Committed emissions from existing energy infrastructure jeopardize 1.5 °C climate target. Nat. Clim. Change 572, 373–377 (2019).
Pfeiffer, A., Hepburn, C., Vogt-Schilb, A. & Caldecott, B. Committed emissions from existing and planned power plants and asset stranding required to meet the Paris Agreement. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 054019 (2018).
Rekker, S, Evaluating fossil fuel companies’ alignment with 1.5 °C climate pathways. UQ eSpace https://doi.org/10.48610/1357886 (2023).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information
Nature Climate Change thanks Maida Hadziosmanovic and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended Data Fig. 1 Historical contribution (1980-2018), reserves (in 2017) and production (2010-2014) levels as a percentage of the world for the largest ten oil and natural gas companies (based on reserves).
This figure demonstrates the strength and reliability of the allocation method used. The average production rate from 2010 to 2018, as proposed in this study, offers several benefits in terms of accurately representing current technologies and geopolitical factors. This stands in contrast to the historical contribution and reserve allocation methods.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Production overshoot in 2020 for our sample of 74 coal companies (panel a), 67 oil companies (panel b), and 70 gas companies (panel c) relative to MESSAGE GLOBIOM SSP2-RCP1.9 consistent production pathways.
This figure shows the performance since the base year (cumulative production since the base year 2014 relative to MESSAGE GLOBIOM SSP2-consistent production pathway). Fossil fuel producers with a value of less (more) than one produced less (more) than the SSP2-RCP1.9 consistent production pathway in 2020. Companies are listed in order of magnitude in the graph.
Extended Data Fig. 3 Estimated year to finish total SSP2-RCP1.9 consistent production budget (until 2050) for our sample of 74 coal companies (panel a), 67 oil companies (panel b), and 70 gas companies (panel c) assuming production growth at average 2010-2018 levels.
This figure shows the year in which a company’s total MESSAGE GLOBIOM SSP2-consistent production budget (until 2050) will be fully produced if production continues at 2010-2018 growth levels. Company data is projected from 2020 onwards (mergers and acquisitions after are not accounted for). Finishing the production budget before 2050 indicates a misalignment with the SSP2 pathway. The earlier the budget is fully produced, the less consistent the company is with the SSP2 pathway. Companies are listed in order of magnitude in the graph.
About this article
Cite this article
Rekker, S., Chen, G., Heede, R. et al. Evaluating fossil fuel companies’ alignment with 1.5 °C climate pathways. Nat. Clim. Chang. 13, 927–934 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01734-0