Latest news with #emissions
Bloomberg
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Europe's Far-Right Says 2040 Climate Target Should Be Rejected
The European Union's proposed target to cut emissions by 90% by 2040 should be rejected, according to the far-right grouping responsible for leading negotiations in parliament. Ondrej Knotek, the rapporteur from the Patriots for Europe, which contains lawmakers from Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's Fidesz party and France's Rassemblement National, said the climate goal would have 'devastating consequences' for energy-intensive industries.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Methane Emissions Intensity of Permian Basin Declined by More than Half in Two Years, New S&P Global Commodity Insights Analysis Finds
New analysis provides the most accurate public, basin-wide estimate of methane emissions for the Permian HOUSTON, July 24, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- The methane intensity of oil and gas production in the Permian Basin—an area responsible for half of U.S. oil production and one fifth of natural gas—declined by more than 50% during the 2022-2024 period as improved operations, better equipment and the utilization of AI and other advanced technologies led to reductions across all observable plume rates (large and small), according to a new analysis by S&P Global Commodity Insights. The latest data for the year 2024 show the methane emissions intensity of upstream oil and gas operations in the region to be 0.44% per barrel of oil equivalent—a 29% reduction from the previous year. Absolute annual 2024 methane emissions decreased by 21.3 billion cubic feet (bcf), a 22% decline from the previous year. Given that methane is a potent greenhouse gas, the reduction was equivalent to 11.1 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions avoided (100-year equivalency factor of 28*). Since the end of 2022, absolute emissions have declined by 55.2 bcf, equivalent to 28.8 MMT of carbon dioxide emissions avoided. To put the numbers into perspective, the 28.8 MMt CO2e reduction in absolute methane emissions over a two-year period was: Roughly equivalent to emissions from the nation of Lithuania 15% greater than the emissions avoided by all electric vehicles sold in the United States and the European Union 50% greater than the total emissions reductions in the UK power sector Equal to 2.2 billion trash bags recycled instead of landfilled Greater than the greenhouse gas emissions from cooling and heating all the homes in California The findings of the latest analysis for Permian upstream methane, produced in partnership with leading methane management firm Insight M, are based on high frequency observation data that include more than 500 high-resolution aerial surveys covering 90% of the basin's production to provide the most accurate, basin-wide estimate of methane emissions. "Access to reliable methane data is crucial to provide critical context to benchmark and allow companies to differentiate themselves and truly compete on carbon," said Kevin Birn, Head of the Center for Emissions Excellence, S&P Global Commodity Insights. "Whereas data quality still varies globally, improvements in access to reliable observation data in places like the Permian are leading the way and allow us to more credibly measure the impact of emissions mitigation efforts." The overflight data to which S&P Global Commodity Insights has access showed reductions across all observable plume rates, from large (1000+kg per hour) to small (10kg per hour) emissions. The continued emissions reductions occurred despite the relatively low commercial value of gas in the region, where the annual average price for those selling gas on the spot market was just $0.02 in 2024 due to oversupply and a lack of takeaway capacity. Consequently, the lost economic value (i.e. had the gas been captured and sold) from fugitive emissions equated to just 0.002% of total 2024 hydrocarbon revenues, the analysis reveals. The analysis attributes the continued breadth and depth of the emissions decline to ongoing improvements in equipment as well as increasing deployment of new technologies—from AI-driven analysis of operational data to on-the-ground sensors, aircraft overflights and satellites—that make it possible to detect leaks with greater speed and accuracy. "Methane emissions management is being increasingly normalized as part of field operations. It's becoming a standard and accepted part of the field staff's responsibilities," said Raoul LeBlanc, Vice President, Global Upstream, S&P Global Commodity Insights. "At the same time, oilfield service manufacturers are now producing equipment that includes emissions reduction as an important feature, and operators are increasingly utilizing AI and machine learning to not only 'find and fix' but 'predict and prevent' emissions." About the analysis Produced by S&P Global Commodity Insights Center for Emissions Excellence in partnership with Insight M, the Permian upstream methane analysis combines near-total coverage of the basin and high frequency observations to provide the most accurate public, basin-wide estimate of fugitive methane leaks and venting released to date. Frequency: The 2024 observed data is derived from roughly 529 survey flights which took place on 175 separate days spread over the course of the year. Coverage: 81.8% of the 161,000 active Permian wells, (78.5% of conventional wells and 88.6% of unconventional wells) Assets supplying 90.0% of the 3.9 billion boe produced in 2024. Resolution: Overflights offer a level of resolution that is up to 5 times greater than that of satellites, providing reliable attribution not only by facility, but in most cases to specific assets or pieces of equipment. Threshold: Measurements taken detect emissions as low as the range of 50-10 kg/hr depending on the specific overflight. These observed volumes account for more than 68% of total methane released to the atmosphere from upstream oil and gas operations. The volumes from all sources below this threshold were estimated using the Rutherford model developed by Stanford University and included in the totals used in the analysis. More information on the methodology employed by Insight M can be found here. Global Warming Potential Factor: S&P Global Commodity Insights conversion of methane to CO2 equivalency are based on a Global Warming Potential (GWP) factor for 100 years of 28 tons of CO2 per ton of methane. Using the 20-year factor of 86 would thus increase both the emissions reduction and the continuing emissions to 3.07 times the figures cited in this report. * Compared with a ton of CO2, a ton of methane (CH4) absorbs more energy and thus has a greater impact on earth's warming. However, methane stays in the atmosphere for only about a decade, whereas CO2 persists for hundreds of years. When looked at on a 100-year basis, methane thus has a Global Warming Potential of 27-30 times that of the same mass of CO2. Media Contacts: Jeff Marn +1-202-463-8213, Americas: Kathleen Tanzy + 1 917-331-4607, Melissa Tan + 65-6597-6241, About S&P Global Commodity InsightsAt S&P Global Commodity Insights, our complete view of global energy and commodity markets enables our customers to make decisions with conviction and create long-term, sustainable value. We're a trusted connector that brings together thought leaders, market participants, governments, and regulators and we create solutions that lead to progress. Vital to navigating commodity markets, our coverage includes oil and gas, power, chemicals, metals, agriculture, shipping and energy transition. Platts® products and services, including leading benchmark price assessments in the physical commodity markets, are offered through S&P Global Commodity Insights. S&P Global Commodity Insights maintains clear structural and operational separation between its price assessment activities and the other activities carried out by S&P Global Commodity Insights and the other business divisions of S&P Global. S&P Global Commodity Insights is a division of S&P Global (NYSE: SPGI). S&P Global is the world's foremost provider of credit ratings, benchmarks, analytics and workflow solutions in the global capital, commodity and automotive markets. With every one of our offerings, we help many of the world's leading organizations navigate the economic landscape so they can plan for tomorrow, today. For more information visit View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE S&P Global Commodity Insights Sign in to access your portfolio
RNZ News
a day ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
'A ray of sunshine': NZ litigants spurred on by international climate ruling
Climate Change Minister Simon Watts. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone A landmark ruling by the United Nations' highest court puts further pressure on the New Zealand government over a large hole in its climate plans, a group of climate lawyers say. Another litigant taking on big polluters calls it a "a ray of sunshine" - while the climate minister will only say it's "long and complicated". The International Court of Justice (ICJ) found overnight that countries can be responsible for paying reparations for damage caused by their greenhouse gases. It also said governments are legally obliged to set climate targets that are consistent with keeping temperatures within 1.5C (not 2C) and that they must "pursue measures capable of achieving" those goals. The decision said states could be in breach of international law for failing to address fossil fuel consumption, granting fossil fuel exploration licenses, and providing fossil fuel subsidies, something the New Zealand government is doing with its $200 million fund for drilling . New Zealand is currently on track to be over 80 million tonnes of emissions short of meeting its 2030 climate target, because the coalition government has broken with plans by previous governments to meet the target largely by buying carbon credits from overseas. The coalition has been told there is no feasible way to meet the target purely inside this country, without some kind of offshore deal. While Climate Change Minister Simon Watts has acknowledged that this is true, he has so far ducked making any public commitment to closing any of the necessary deals beyond "exploring options". At times, ministers have explicitly said the government wouldn't spend money offshore to meet the target, despite officials warning them that their inability to explain how New Zealand would close the gap would lead to overseas scrutiny. Jessica Palairet, executive director of Lawyers for Climate Action, said the international ruling confirmed that paying lip service to international climate targets wasn't enough. Under the Paris Agreement, countries' targets are known as NDCs, or Nationally Determined Contributions. The first ones run from 2021-2030, and the second set from 2031-2035. "The judgment confirms that New Zealand can't just say it hopes it will meet the NDC and that it's committed to our targets, it has to take real and demonstrable steps towards meeting it, it has to demonstrate that intent to meet it. The judgment clarifies that, and I think in the face of an 89 million tonne hole, there are real questions about whether or not we're doing that," she said. "When we made the NDC commitment in the first place, we had a plan for how we were going to meet the gap, but the government is changing course and the ICJ starkly brings into focus whether that is lawful." Palairet said the ruling also sharpened questions over whether New Zealand's second Paris Agreement target , out to 2035 was aligned with curtailing heating within 1.5C. Watts has defended the new target of 51-55 percent reductions by 2035, saying the cuts were difficult to achieve and met the definition of ambition, but several experts - and independent advice - disagreed. "There have been real questions raised about whether our second NDC is 1.5 degrees aligned," Palairet said. "Put it this way, Simon Watts specially asked officials for the second NDC to align with domestic emissions budgets, to avoid having to pay offshore mitigation." "The problem is that our domestic emissions budgets are set according to a test that's different to the where that leaves us is we have an NDC that likely isn't 1.5 degrees-aligned likely doesn't reflect highest possible ambition and likely doesn't reflect our fair share," she said. "The ICJ opinion really draws into sharp focus whether that is lawful." Palairet said court's opinion that 1.5C was a binding target could also have implications for the government's plans to lower the country's methane target. The coalition has been considering lowering the goal for methane reductions from between a 24 and 47 per cent by 2050 to between 14 and 24 percent. "The ICJ opinion has crystalised 1.5C as the target states have to work towards," Palairet said. "The government is considering reducing our methane target to 14 percent," she said. "The problem is that government's own independent expert advisory panel said that a 14 percent target was consistent with 2C, so I think there's a real question if New Zealand reduces its methane target to 14 percent, whether that's consistent with international law." Palairet said the government's gas and oil exploration subsidies and backtracking on the ban on new offshore exploration might also be incompatible the court's statements. "The ICJ had really strong statements on those kind of subsidies and decisions being in breach of international legal obligations." "It's advisory only, it's non-binding but it is really authoritative and it holds significant legal and moral authority and it's very likely going to be used in court cases all around the world, including New Zealand court cases." That might include Lawyers' for Climate Action's existing judicial review against Watts, which argues there are glaring holes in the country's emissions reduction plans. The world's top greenhouse gas emitters denied they had any obligations beyond the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC) and the 2015 Paris agreement. The court rejected that argument, saying a range of other treaties applied, including the UN convention on the law of the sea, the Vienna convention for the protection of the ozone layer, the Montreal protocol, the convention on biological diversity and the UN convention to combat desertification. It also said states were obliged to cooperate to solve climate change. Asked to comment on the ruling, Watts sent a written statement noting the advisory opinion had been issued. "Climate change is an important issue in our region, and we know our Pacific Island neighbours are following this development closely," it said. "This is a long, complicated opinion, and New Zealand will study it carefully before commenting on the substance." Iwi climate leader Mike Smith said environmental lawyers were already discussing how to use the landmark ruling in New Zealand. Smith won the right in the Supreme Court last year to sue seven companies - including Z Energy, Genesis Energy, NZ Steel and Fonterra - for their role in causing climate change. He said the findings by the international court overnight offered hope in a time of worsening climate damage. "In all of that darkness this is a ray of sunshine, this is a beacon, it gives us hope that we can leverage these decisions and effect change," he said. "It strengthens [my case] in the sense that the decision confirmed that states are legally obligated to prevent climate harm and they must not support or subsidise emissions-intensive activities." "I've been talking to the lawyers from ELI, the Environmental Law Initiative, and they are all putting their minds to what falls out the bottom of this opinion and what opportunities are there now to bring further proceedings against the government."
The Guardian
a day ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Australia warned it could face legal action over ‘wrongful' fossil fuel actions after landmark climate ruling from world's top court
Australia could face international legal action over its fossil fuel production and failure to rapidly cut emissions, Vanuatu's climate minister says, after a potentially watershed declaration by the world's top court. An International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion published in the Hague on Wednesday found countries had a legal obligation to take measures to prevent climate change and aim to limit global heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, and that high-emitting countries that failed to act could be liable to pay restitution to low-emitting countries. The case was instigated by law students in Vanuatu and referred to the ICJ by a decision of the UN General Assembly in 2023 by 130 countries, including Australia. The opinion was hailed as an historic moment by Pacific island representatives, climate campaigners and legal academics. Vanuatu said it planned to push for a UN resolution to support its implementation. Australia had joined other significant emitters, including the US and China, in arguing in submissions to the court that countries' obligations were limited to complying with the 2015 Paris climate agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The ICJ, represented by a panel of 15 judges, disagreed. It found all countries had binding obligations to act, not just under UN climate agreements, but under international human rights law, the law of the sea and customary international law. It said countries could be found liable if they failed to address fossil fuel production, consumption, subsidies and exploration licences. Sign up: Clear Air newsletter Vanuatu's climate change minister, Ralph Regenvanu, said it would give Pacific island nations 'much greater leverage' at climate talks and in dealing with partner countries, such as Australia. He told the ABC's Radio National it would take time to fully examine the 500-page opinion, but it suggested litigation was 'definitely' an option. 'According to the advisory the ICJ handed down today, Australia is committing internationally wrongful acts as it is sponsoring and subsidising fossil fuel production and excessive emissions,' Regenvanu said. 'Australia is one of the major contributors to fossil fuel production. It's the third largest exporter of fossil fuels in the world. It's a major contributor to emissions … It needs to align itself with the advisory opinion and cease this conduct that is contributing to emissions and start making reparations.' Dean Bialek, an international lawyer and former lead climate negotiator for island nations, said the opinion was 'unusually robust' and would have 'hugely significant' ramifications for Australia. Bialek said the court's confirmation of the primacy of the goal of limiting heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels meant Australia should be setting an emissions reduction target for 2035 in the 'mid to high 70s' – that is, at least 75% below 2005 levels – when it made that decision later this year. He said the opinion made it 'inescapable' that the Albanese government needed to include a 'climate trigger' as it reformed national environment laws, and was a further demonstration that it needed to 'intensify its diplomatic legwork' to host the Cop31 UN climate summit in partnership with the Pacific next year. Retta Berryman, a senior lawyer at Environmental Justice Australia, agreed the opinion would help measure whether the federal government's upcoming climate commitments were ambitious enough, and said it was a 'clear statement of the evolving legal standards around climate change'. 'We are likely to continue to see significant climate litigation in Australia against governments and companies,' she said. Australian National University associate professor Siobhan McDonnell, a lawyer and climate advisor to Vanuatu, said the opinion was 'historic', stating as it did that 'all states have international human rights obligations, including the rights to ensure life, health and the rights to a clean and safe environment'. The Australian Greens leader, Larissa Waters, said the ruling made it clear that 'every one of Labor's new coal or gas approvals risks Australia being legally liable for the climate consequences'. 'This should be a turning point. Fossil fuel profits cannot override a climate safe future,' she said. Wesley Morgan, a research associate with the Institute for Climate Risk & Response at the University of New South Wales, said Australia had dozens of coal and gas developments up for approval and the government must 'heed the message from the Hague' when considering them. 'The days of impunity for the fossil fuel industry are coming to an end,' he said. A federal government spokesperson said Australia was proud to have joined the Pacific in co-sponsoring this Vanuatu-led initiative, and recognised that climate change was 'one of the greatest existential threats to all humanity and that it's having a significant effect on our region'. They noted that the Coalition was debating scrapping its commitment to reaching net zero emissions by 2050, but Labor was committed to working with the Pacific to 'strengthen global climate action'. 'We will continue to turn around their decade of denial and delay on climate by embedding serious climate targets in law and making the changes necessary to achieve them,' the spokesperson said. 'We will now carefully consider the court's opinion.'
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
The ICJ's ruling means Australia and other major polluters face a new era of climate reparations
Today, Australia has found itself on the wrong side of history. The International Court of Justice has handed down a landmark ruling in the most significant climate decision ever issued by a court. As a barrister representing Solomon Islands in the case, I was in the courtroom to hear the judges reshape the global fight for climate justice. The world's top court resoundingly rejected conservative arguments made by Australia and other high-emitting countries such as the United States, China and Saudi Arabia seeking to justify continued fossil fuel extraction. Instead, the court made a slew of progressive statements – ones that will have far-reaching implications. Under international law, countries are now bound to rapidly reduce their emissions below 1.5 degrees of warming. Failure to do so could result in developed countries like Australia having to pay monetary compensation to developing countries or being required to rebuild infrastructure and restore ecosystems damaged by climate change. This means we could be entering a new era of climate reparations. This is a watershed moment in the global environmental movement. In a breakthrough for climate campaigners, the court specifically targeted the fossil fuel industry in its ruling and held that countries failing to take action to protect the environment from greenhouse gases – including from fossil fuel production, consumption, exploration licences or subsidies – may commit an 'internationally wrongful act.' With today's decision, that can now be punished under international law. So what implications does this have for Australia? Australia is looking to host COP31 next year and stands on the brink of releasing its updated 2035 emissions reduction target in coming months. As it does so, it may have to change its legislation and policies to rapidly curb the emissions of companies in its jurisdiction. First, the ruling puts pressure on the Albanese government to increase its ambitions for emissions reduction. The court made clear that countries must set goals under the Paris agreement which align with the 1.5C temperature target. Climate Action Tracker has found that for Australia to carry its fair share of the global emissions reduction burden, it should reduce its emissions by 76% by 2035 against a 2005 baseline. This aligns with the upper range of possible targets identified by the Climate Change Authority, which has suggested an emissions target between 65% and 75% by 2035. In light of the ICJ decision, a failure to set a target close to 75% is likely to come under legal or political challenge by other countries and domestic campaigners. Second, to comply with its international obligations, Australia will have to curb its production and use of fossil fuels. Despite its tough talk on climate change, the Albanese government has continued to approve coal, oil and gas projects at an alarming rate. In recent months the government has approved the extension of Woodside's controversial North West Shelf development, a massive gas project which will operate to 2070 and emit an enormous 87.9m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent each year. If Australia secures the hosting rights to COP31 it will come under intense pressure from its neighbours in the Pacific to live up to its rhetoric and rapidly transition away from fossil fuels. Third, and most importantly, today's ruling means that Australia could pay climate reparations in the future. Developing countries may bring claims against Australia seeking damages. As a high-emitting developed country and one of the largest exporters of coal, oil and gas in the world, Australia has both the historical responsibility for climate change and the means to pay other nations for compensation and restitution. While the scale of any reparations will depend on the amount of damage suffered by the country bringing the claim, the breadth of climate change impacts mean that Australia and other countries could be faced with very high-value cases. Money is a strong motivator. The world court's decision today means that the threat of reparations can now be used to compel action from the worst, most stubborn climate offenders – Australia included. That is transformative for climate lawyers, giving us a powerful tool to pressure governments and corporations to acknowledge the realities of our warming planet. But it is a victory for everyone – a clear statement that the status quo isn't sufficient. We must act now to confront the climate crisis. And in a moment when hope feels hard to come by, that's very good news indeed. Harj Narulla is a barrister and leading global expert on climate litigation at Doughty Street Chambers and the University of Oxford. He represented Solomon Islands before the ICJ but is writing in his personal capacity
