Five Rich Nations Jeopardizing Future With Plans for Fossil Fuel Expansion: Report

The United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Norway "are condemning communities in the Global South to a state of perpetual crisis which they did nothing to create."


Ocean Rebellion staged a theatrical action with a Boris Johnson head and an "Oil head" burning a boat on Marazion beach on June 5, 2021 in Cornwall, United Kingdom.

 (Photo: Gav Goulder/In Pictures via Getty Images)


KENNY STANCIL

COMMONDREAMS.ORG

November 12, 2021


As the COP26 climate summit draws to a close following two weeks of talks and pledges in Glasgow, a new report out Friday details five wealthy nations' life-threatening plans to expand fossil fuel production, exposing the utter emptiness of their professed commitments to decarbonization.

"Coal, oil, and gas production must fall globally by 69%, 31%, and 28% respectively between now and 2030... Projections suggest that the Fossil Fuelled 5 will... actually increase oil and gas production by 33% and 27%."

Shedding further light on the enormous gap between rhetoric and reality, the report, titled The Fossil Fuelled 5, compares governments' most recent emission reduction targets with their future energy plans and finds that even as they refer to themselves as climate leaders, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Norway intend to approve and subsidize new fossil fuel projects that "will be in operation for decades to come."

Despite climate scientists' repeated warnings about the need to keep coal, oil, and gas underground to have a fighting chance of limiting global warming to 1.5ºC above preindustrial levels by the end of the century, several of the world's wealthiest nations "are doubling down on fossil fuel production," says the report, which was assembled by Freddie Daley, a research associate at the University of Sussex, in collaboration with the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, as well as key partners in each of the five countries analyzed—Oil Change International, Uplift U.K., The Australia Institute, Stand.earth, and Greenpeace Norway.

The world is currently on pace for catastrophic levels of heating, and further increasing the extraction and burning of fossil fuels—the main driver of the climate emergency—will "have disastrous impacts for all life on our planet," the report notes, "but especially those communities in the Global South who have done the least to create this crisis and have the fewest resources to adapt to its impacts."

According to the report, "Coal, oil, and gas production must fall globally by 69%, 31%, and 28% respectively between now and 2030 to keep the 1.5ºC target alive." Exemplifying how "net-zero" by mid-century promises "do not focus on the urgent need to stop production and consumption of fossil fuels in the immediate term," the report adds that over the course of this decade, "projections suggest that the Fossil Fuelled 5 will reduce coal production by only 30%, and actually increase oil and gas production by 33% and 27%, respectively."

Related Content

'Dangerous Trajectory': Report Details a World Set to Consume Fossil Fuels at Full Speed
Julia Conley

Many had hoped that countries would respond to the coronavirus crisis by jumpstarting the renewable energy transition. Although they vowed to "build back better," the U.S., U.K., Australia, Canada, and Norway have provided "more than $150 billion USD to support the production and consumption of fossil fuels since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic," states the report. "This level of support from the Fossil Fuelled 5 is more than the entire G7 put towards clean energy as part of the pandemic recovery effort ($147 billion)."

"There's an alarming gap between what wealthy nations are saying and what they are doing," Daley said in a statement. "They seem to be quite content to make pledges and promises with one hand, while expanding and subsidizing fossil fuel production to the tune of billions on the other."

"Not only are these wealthy nations jeopardizing their own futures and the futures of their citizens through this continued expansion," he added, "but they are condemning communities in the Global South to a state of perpetual crisis which they did nothing to create."

Country-specific findings from the report include:

The United States has pledged to halve emissions by 2030 yet has simultaneously provided $20 billion in annual support to the fossil fuel industry;

Despite hosting COP26, the United Kingdom is expected to greenlight the Cambo oil field, which contains approximately 255 million barrels of oil;

Despite its recent commitment to net-zero by 2050, Australia has over 100 fossil fuel projects currently in the approval pipeline;

Canada is looking to increase their price on carbon but also provided approximately $17 billion in public finance to three fossil fuel pipelines between 2018 and 2020; and
Norway has raised its ambition to decrease emissions but has already granted 60+ new licenses for fossil fuel production and access to 84 new exploration zones in 2021 alone.

Progressive advocates from all five countries denounced their respective governments for subsidizing planet-wrecking fossil fuels when the world is demanding a rapid and just transition to clean energy.

The United States—which has planned to expand oil and gas production more than any other country between 2019 and 2030—was described by Collin Rees, U.S. program manager at Oil Change International, as "the poster child for climate hypocrisy."

"If we are to prevent the worst impacts of the climate crisis from becoming a reality, we must address the root of our collective problem: fossil fuels."

"The world's largest historical emitter [is] claiming the mantle of climate leadership while pouring fuel on the fire of the climate crisis," Rees continued. "[President] Joe Biden's words will ring hollow until he cancels deadly fossil fuel expansion projects like the Dakota Access Pipeline or the dozens of proposed oil and gas export terminals awaiting approval from his administration."

He added that "the U.S. remains a massive driver of oil and gas expansion, and that won't change until our leaders commit to a managed phase-out of fossil fuel extraction that truly protects communities, workers, and the climate."

The U.S., U.K., Austalia, Canada, and Norway "have the responsibility and capacity to transition rapidly away from fossil fuels with limited impact to their own economies, and to support developing countries around the world to move away from fossil fuels, under timeframes and conditions that are fair, reasonable, and just," says the report. "Instead, they are downplaying their historical responsibility for the climate crisis and effectively appropriating the limited remaining fossil fuels that can be produced before humanity breaches 1.5ºC."

One reason why wealthy signatories to the Paris agreement have been able to avoid scrutiny for "expanding fossil fuel production in the face of overwhelming evidence that they need to do the opposite" is because exported fossil fuels are not reflected in the producer country's domestic emissions, which is why the report calls them "the elephant in the room" that must be addressed.

While the countries that import fossil fuels are held responsible for those emissions on paper, the reality is that major coal, oil, and gas exporters are still exacerbating global greenhouse gas pollution and therefore undermining efforts to curb rising temperatures, "impacting the lives of billions alive today and those yet to be born," the report notes.

"Together, the Fossil Fuelled 5 account for 25% of global fossil fuel exports," says the report. "Nations such as Australia, Norway, and the United States continue to export huge amounts of coal, oil, and/or gas, essentially exporting their greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to the continued fossil fuel dependence of many countries worldwide."

The report emphasizes that "the principles of fairness and equity are vital for collective international action on climate," adding:

Wealthy countries failing to phase down fossil fuel production leaves little incentive for developing nations, who are typically more dependent on the revenues and employment opportunities derived from fossil fuel production, to do the same.

Wealthy nations expanding fossil fuel production has a symbolic effect. Continuing to extract and burn fossil fuels, as well as supporting the fossil fuel industry through subsidies, implies that large-scale fossil fuel production is compatible with steep declines in emissions and essential to future prosperity, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

To "end the era of fossil fuels," the report urges the U.S., U.K., Australia, Canada, and Norway to:

Halt the licensing for further exploration and extraction of fossil fuels;

Commit to a timeline for domestic phase-out of fossil fuels in line with 1.5ºC, noting that wealthy countries can and should move first and should therefore exceed the average rates identified in the Production Gap Report of phasing out coal, oil and gas on average by 11%, 4% and 3% respectively each year;

End the support for fossil fuel production through subsidies, tax relief and other mechanisms of government support;

Join the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) to work with other ambitious governments to end fossil fuel production and fund a just transition for workers;

Act as first movers as part of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty; and
Redirect the vast financial support currently provided to fossil fuel industries towards helping developing countries shift away from a reliance on fossil fuel production and consumption.

"If we are to prevent the worst impacts of the climate crisis from becoming a reality," the report concludes, "we must address the root of our collective problem: fossil fuels."

Bank CEOs Rake In Big Profits as Wall Street Ramps Up Fossil Fuel Financing

The 65 biggest banks committed $869 billion to firms expanding the fossil fuel industry last year, a new report says.

By Derek Seidman ,

Truthout

August 25, 2025

Climate activists rally outside Bank of America Tower in Midtown Manhattan as part of the March to End Fossil Fuels on September 19, 2023.

Erik McGregor / LightRocket via Getty Images

Big banks across the world are substantially increasing their financing of the fossil fuel industry, including for the industry’s expansion during a time of intensifying climate crisis, all while pulling back from previously stated climate commitments.

These are among the key highlights of the most recent Banking on Climate Chaos report, which found that the 65 biggest banks globally committed a whopping $869 billion to companies conducting business in fossil fuels in 2024, representing a huge $162 billion increase from 2023.

“These financial flows reflect the policy retreat of banks abandoning climate goals for short-term profits,” Campaign Director for the Climate and Energy Program at Rainforest Action Network Dianne Enriquez told Truthout.

Banking on Climate Chaos, co-authored by several organizations including Rainforest Action Network, Oil Change International, Indigenous Environmental Network, and Sierra Club, is an authoritative annual study — endorsed by hundreds of organizations across the world — of how banks finance the fossil fuel industry.

The report also shows that U.S. banks like JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo dominated the heights of fossil fuel financing. A Truthout analysis reveals that the CEOs of the top six U.S. banks that are financing fossil fuels together made over a half-billion dollars from 2022 to 2024. CEO pay is astronomically larger than the average incomes of communities most impacted by their fossil fuel financing.

Gulf Coast Communities Take on Insurers Backing Trump-Approved Fossil Fuels

Organizers in Louisiana are fighting the Trump administration’s efforts to expand methane export infrastructure. By Derek Seidman , Truthout June 6, 2025

“These billion-dollar industries are making money off of our backs while killing us,” Roishetta Ozane, founder of the Vessel Project in Lake Charles, Louisiana, which endorsed the report, told Truthout.

Ramping Up Fossil Fuel Financing

The most notable finding in the new report is that, during 2024, global banks “significantly increased their fossil fuel financing, including ramping up finance for fossil fuel expansion,” with the 65 biggest banks globally committing $429 billion to companies expanding fossil fuel production and infrastructure in 2024.

As the report notes, the “growth in fossil fuel finance is troubling because new fossil fuel infrastructure locks in more decades of fossil fuel dependence.”

“Global banks continue to fuel the climate crisis at an alarming scale,” Jessye Waxman, Sustainable Finance Campaign Advisor for the Sierra Club, told Truthout.

This comes amid intensifying climate chaos and the desperate need to vastly ramp down fossil fuel production, according to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has called for “a substantial reduction in fossil fuel use” without delay.

U.S. banks dominated the list of banks increasing their fossil fuel financing, with JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and Morgan Stanley holding six of the top eight spots. These banks all increased their fossil fuel financing from 2023 to 2024 by a range of 30 percent to 50 percent, amounting to nearly $70 billion more fossil fuel funding between them.

“U.S. banks are leading this surge,” said Waxman, who noted that JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo alone “collectively represent over 21 percent of the total global fossil fuel financing covered in the report.”

The report shows that banks based in the U.S., Canada, Europe, and Japan account for around 83 percent of fossil fuel financing globally, highlighting the massive imbalance of fossil financing profiteering that comes from the Global North while disproportionately impacting the Global South. The report includes case studies on the banking behind contested companies and projects worldwide, such as Mozambique LNG and JSW Steel in India.

“Globally, people are paying dearly,” said RAN’s Enriquez.

All told, the 65 biggest banks in the report have committed a staggering $7.9 trillion in fossil fuel financing since 2016, the year the Paris Agreement, an international treaty to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, went into effect, the report notes.

Loopholes and Greenwashing

Banking on Climate Chaos also contains findings on howbanks finance fossil fuel corporations — findings that support the claim that banks have been “greenwashing” themselves by giving lip service to climate concerns even as they continue to bankroll climate catastrophe.

Notably, the report found that only 5.3 percent of financing to fossil fuel companies came at the project level, whereas 94.7 percent of it came at the corporate level. This corporate-level financing increased by nearly $117 billion from 2023 to 2024.

In other words, while banks have restricted direct financing of dirty fossil fuel projects that could garner bad publicity, they’ve simultaneously increased direct, unhindered financing to the corporationsdoing business in fossil fuels.

“Banks’ corporate financing loophole is a textbook case of greenwashing,” said Sierra Club’s Waxman, noting that the loophole “gives fossil fuel companies unrestricted capital to pursue harmful expansion.”

“It renders banks’ climate policies toothless by allowing them to maintain the illusion of responsibility, while behind the scenes, they continue to bankroll the fossil fuel industry,” said Waxman.

All this adds weight to accusations of greenwashing: Banks are making face-saving gestures even as they continue to bolster the corporate coffers of the fossil fuel industry.

Meanwhile, the report also highlights many banks’ rapid flight from the net-zero “commitments” that they so adamantly committed themselves to just a few years ago.

The prime evidence of this is the near-total collapse of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), a United Nations-supported initiative to align global banks’ lending and underwriting practices with the goal of reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Leading fossil fuel financiers like JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo had previously celebrated their self-proclaimed climate concerns by joining the NZBA. But in the face of rising opportunities to capitalize on fossil fuel expansion — from corporate mergers and expanded drilling practices to a new oil-friendly Trump administration — these banks and many more have quit the NZBA entirely. U.S. lawmakers have suggested that banks like JPMorgan Chase have misled the public and investors as it backed away from its purported climate commitments.

All told, the report’s data and analysis support the notion that banks are not passive actors when it comes to the global climate crisis. Rather, banks are active agents maneuvering to keep bankrolling fossil fuels corporations, and they have revealed their climate commitments to be exceedingly thin.

CEOs Profit Big

The report starkly illustrates how U.S. banks dominated global fossil fuel financing in 2024, occupying half of the top dozen slots. JPMorgan Chase was the top bank financing fossil fuels ($53.5 billion), with Bank of America second ($46 billion), Citigroup third ($44.7 billion), Wells Fargo fifth ($39.3 billion), Goldman Sachs tenth ($28.5 billion), and Morgan Stanley twelfth ($27 billion).

Top executives at these banks have also personally profited enormously as they’ve overseen an expansion in fossil fuel financing in recent years. A Truthout analysis shows that, according to their banks’ most recent proxy statements, from 2022 and 2024, the CEOs of these banks together raked in well over a half-billion dollars — $543.75 million in total — in their total compensation.

CEO Compensation of Top Six U.S. Fossil Financing Banks, 2022-2024, based on 2025 Proxy Fillings.  Derek Seidman

In 2024, these six banks’ CEOs took in a total of $185,350,903 million, or an average of nearly $31 million.

Notably, this CEO compensation is astronomically higher than the per capita incomes of communities most impacted by the fossil fuel projects overseen by companies that their banks are financing.

One of those communities is Lake Charles, Louisiana, which is surrounded by fossil fuel and petrochemical facilities. As Truthout previously reported, local organizers like the Vessel Project’s Ozane are resisting the construction of facilities like Venture Global’s huge new LNG export terminal, Calcasieu Pass 2.

Banking on Climate Chaos notes that Venture Global LNG’s top two bankers in 2024 were Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase.

In 2024, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, was the top earner in 2024 with $39 million. (As of April 2025, Dimon also owned 7,186,564 units of JPMorgan stock, worth today around over $2 billion.) By contrast, the per capita income in Lake Charles, Louisiana, is $35,847. This means Dimon took in 1,087 times the per capita income of a Lake Charles resident last year. Ted Pick, CEO of Morgan Stanley, took in $24,881,032 in 2024, or 694 times the income of an average Lake Charles resident. (It’s worth noting that while Morgan Stanley’s April 2025 proxy statement reported Pick’s 2024 compensation at $24,881,032, an earlier February 2025 filing said his 2024 compensation was set as $34 million, which would be 948 times the income of an average Lake Charles resident).

The injustice of these stark disparities resonates with Ozane, who told Truthout she founded the Vessel Project amid the destruction caused by climate-induced disasters that included Hurricanes Laura and Delta. “I started connecting the dots and really looking at the intersection between these low-income neighborhoods facing these crises versus the polluters who are causing these climate-induced disasters,” Ozane said.

Ozane called Jamie Dimon’s 2024 compensation of $39 million “staggering,” especially given that it was “based off investments in fossil fuel projects that are not only killing the people in my community, but harming this entire world.”

“It highlights the troubling disconnect between the financial elite like Jamie Dimon and everyday people like myself and my community members,” she said. “It’s especially troubling when his bank finances a project like Venture Global, which is the largest polluter when it comes to methane gas, and it’s right there in my community, a community that is struggling.”

People Over Profit

Banking on Climate Chaos ends with robust demands aimed at curbing bank financing of fossil fuel expansion, instituting policies to advance the transition from fossil fuels and securing climate, protecting human and Indigenous rights, and securing a just and fair energy transition.

“Ultimately, we’d like for banks to immediately halt financing fossil fuel companies that are doing fossil fuel expansion,” Enriquez said.

Waxman also pointed out the need for regulators to “set strong, binding policies — at all levels from regional to state to national — that incentivize banks to clean up their act or face significant penalties.”

Ozane wants to see financial institutions from Citi and JPMorgan in the U.S. to Mizuho and MUFG in Japan take a more responsible approach to their investments and prioritize funding for renewable energy.

“It’s time for these institutions to align their practices with the urgent need for climate action and the urgent need to put people before profit,” she said.


This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.

Derek Seidman is a writer, researcher and historian living in Buffalo, New York. He is a regular contributor for Truthout and a contributing writer for LittleSis.

 

Research: Top scientists issue urgent warning on fossil fuels

Fossil fuels drive interlinked crises that harm health, wildlife, planet

Center for Biological Diversity

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

WASHINGTON— In a review published today in the peer-reviewed journal Oxford Open Climate Change, top scientists issued an urgent warning that fossil fuels and the fossil fuel industry are driving interlinked crises that threaten people, wildlife, and a livable future. 

Today’s review synthesizes the extensive scientific evidence showing that fossil fuels and the fossil fuel industry are fueling not only the climate crisis but also public health harms, environmental injustice, biodiversity loss, and the plastics and agrochemical pollution crises.

The review focuses on the United States as the world’s largest oil and gas producer and dominant contributor to these fossil fuel crises. It presents the solutions already available to phase out fossil fuel extraction and use and transition rapidly and fairly to affordable clean, renewable energy and materials across the economy. 

“The science can’t be any clearer that fossil fuels are killing us,” said Shaye Wolf, Ph.D., climate science director at the Center for Biological Diversity and lead author of the report. “Oil, gas and coal will continue to condemn us to more deaths, wildlife extinctions and extreme weather disasters unless we make dirty fossil fuels a thing of the past. Clean, renewable energy is here, it’s affordable, and it will save millions of lives and trillions of dollars once we make it the centerpiece of our economy.”    

The review highlights that fossil fuels account for about 90% of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions, heating the climate, acidifying oceans, and fueling unprecedented climate disasters. Air pollution from fossil fuel combustion is responsible for millions of premature deaths worldwide and hundreds of thousands of premature deaths in the United States every year. The climate crisis causes additional deaths and physical and mental health harms from escalating climate disasters, disease transmission, food insecurity, and displacement of people. 

Based on their findings and decades of research, the authors urge governments to immediately stop fossil fuel expansion and phase out existing fossil fuel development to limit the damages from the climate crisis. 

“Fossil fuel pollution impacts health at every stage of life, with elevated risks for conditions ranging from premature births to childhood leukemia and severe depression,” said co-author David J.X. González, Ph.D., an assistant professor of environmental health sciences at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health. “We’ve got to work fast to end fossil fuel operations near our homes, schools and hospitals and trade fossil fuel infrastructure for healthy, clean energy.” 

While fossil fuels harm everyone, the review details disproportionate harms of fossil fuel extraction, processing and use on communities of color and low-income communities. 

“Decades of discriminatory policies, such as redlining, have concentrated fossil fuel development in Black, Brown, Indigenous and poor white communities, resulting in devastating consequences,” said Robin Saha, Ph.D., an associate professor at the University of Montana. “For far too long, these fenceline communities have been treated as sacrifice zones by greedy, callous industries. The most polluted communities should be prioritized for clean energy investments and removal and cleanup of dirty fossil fuel infrastructure.”   

Fossil-fuel-induced climate change and pollution are also accelerating extinction risk. Up to one-third of animals and plants could be lost forever in the next 50 years if fossil fuels go unchecked. To protect biodiversity, the review highlights the importance of siting renewable energy infrastructure in the built environment and increasing protections for ecosystems that provide vital carbon storage, among numerous other benefits. 

The review further shows that the fossil fuel industry is increasing the production of plastics, creating pervasive pollution that contaminates the air, water, soil, food systems, wildlife and human bodies.  

The review recommends ambitious targets to reduce primary plastics production and plastic chemicals of concern while incentivizing safe and sustainable plastics alternatives and nonplastic substitutes, as well as sustainable agricultural practices to limit fossil-fueled petrochemical pollution from pesticides and fertilizers.  

The review also discusses a key barrier to transitioning from fossil fuels to clean energy: The fossil fuel industry’s decades-long, multibillion-dollar disinformation campaign to conceal the dangers of its products and block policies to phase out fossil fuels.   

“The fossil fuel industry has spent decades misleading us about the harms of their products and working to prevent meaningful climate action,” said Naomi Oreskes, professor of the history of science at Harvard University. “Perversely, our governments continue to give out hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to this damaging industry. It is past time that stops.”

The 11 coauthors are Shaye Wolf, Ph.D. (Center for Biological Diversity), Robert Bullard, Ph.D. (Texas Southern University), Jonathan J. Buonocore, Ph.D. (Boston University), Nathan Donley, Ph.D. (Center for Biological Diversity),Trisia Farrelly, Ph.D. (Cawthron Institute), John Fleming, Ph.D. (Center for Biological Diversity), David J.X. González, Ph.D. (University of California Berkeley), Naomi Oreskes, Ph.D. (Harvard University), William Ripple, Ph.D. (Oregon State University), Robin Saha, Ph.D. (University of Montana, Missoula), and Mary D. Willis, Ph.D. (Boston University). 

 

---

Journal

Oxford Open Climate Change

DOI

10.1093/oxfclm/kgaf011 

Method of Research

Commentary/editorial

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

Scientists’ Warning on Fossil Fuels

Article Publication Date

31-Mar-2025

Switzerland Wants A Global Roadmap To Phase Out Fossil Fuels – Analysis

April 14, 2026 
SwissInfo
By Luigi Jorio

The Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels – scheduled April 24 to 29 in Santa Marta, Colombia – is the first-ever international summit dedicated solely to phasing out fossil fuels. The conference has taken on a new urgency as the conflict in the Middle East causes disruption in the oil and gas markets.

 
What is the goal of the conference on fossil fuels and who is taking part?

The conference, co-organised by Colombia and the Netherlands, aims to develop concrete solutions to accelerate the gradual elimination of fossil fuels, in line with the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. The meeting seeks to define the legal tools, economic measures and social change needed to ensure a just and orderly transition.

Switzerland will take part in the conference and will be represented by the Ambassador for the Environment, Felix Wertli, the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) says. Another 45 countries, including fossil fuel producers such as Canada and Norway, have confirmed they will attend.

The Santa Marta summit represents a new space for dialogue and cooperation after fossil fuel discussions stalled at the most recent UN Climate Conference (COP30), held in Belém, Brazil. However, it does not intend to replace the formal UN climate negotiations (which some argue are overly influenced by oil lobbies). Its purpose is to create a complementary intergovernmental platform to support practical action by countries that wish to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels.

Why is there a conference on fossil fuel transition now?

Fossil fuels are responsible for 68% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Replacing them with cleaner alternatives such as solar and wind is essential to achieving climate goals.

At the 2023 COP in Dubai, for the first time in more than 30 years of climate negotiations, nearly 200 countries acknowledged the need to progressively reduce the consumption of oil, gas, and coal. However, no concrete progress has been made since then.

While investments in renewable energy have increased, global fossil fuel production is still projected to grow in the coming years.

Last year in Belém, more than 80 countries supported the Brazilian presidency’s idea of a global roadmap for the transition away from fossil fuels. However, the proposal did not make it into the conference’s final text. The blockage came mainly from large oil-producing states such as Saudi Arabia and Russia, as well as from China and India, which are reluctant to undertake a real and rapid shift.

To keep international pressure alive, a smaller group of countries led by Colombia and the Netherlands sought to open new diplomatic ground outside the COP negotiating process, giving rise to the Belém Declaration on a Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels. The document acknowledges that fossil fuel production, consumption, licensing, and subsidies are incompatible with international climate goals.

The Declaration – described as historic because it was also endorsed by fossil fuel producing nations such as Mexico and Australia – laid the groundwork for the Santa Marta conference.

What is Switzerland’s position on phasing out fossil fuels?

Switzerland supports the Brazilian initiative for an international roadmap to exit fossil fuels. The roadmap should identify concrete milestones for implementing the transition, FOEN says. Switzerland is also engaged in international initiatives aimed at eliminating the billions in subsidies granted to fossil fuels.

“The conference in Santa Marta will offer an initial space to exchange views on shared challenges. It marks the beginning of a discussion that is absolutely necessary but also complex,” FOEN writes in an email.

The transition away from fossil fuels is not only a climate issue. It also requires reflection on the implications for the economy, finance, energy security and, not least, the livelihoods of the millions of people working in the fossil fuel industry.

Domestically, Switzerland aims to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. The country has not adopted an explicit ban on fossil fuels. Rather, it plans to reduce their consumption mainly by encouraging the replacement of heating systems in buildings and supporting innovative and sustainable technologies in the industrial sector.

Léonore Hälg of the Swiss Energy Foundation argues that the switch from fossil fuels (and nuclear energy) to electricity and a decreased energy demand significantly reduce Switzerland’s dependence on supplies from geopolitically unstable regions. “The current conflict in the Middle East is a perfect showcase of how powerless oil-importing countries are in reaction to price surges,” she told Swissinfo.

What impact does the Middle East conflict have on the fossil fuel phaseout?

The energy crisis triggered by the US and Israel’s attack on Iran will strengthen the calls for a global phaseout of fossil fuels, Hälg says. However, she adds, “I am not sure it will have a direct effect on countries’ short-term willingness to commit to a clear and binding roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels.”

Paola Yanguas Parra, a policy advisor at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, argues that the current crisis shows that “fossil fuels are not delivering energy security — they are undermining it.” In this sense, she tells Swissinfo, it is likely that this moment will strengthen the case for a global phaseout.

Yanguas Parra identifies two opposing trends: while some governments are expanding fossil fuel production or infrastructure in the name of energy security, others are using the shock to accelerate the shift toward cleaner and more resilient systems. “When the right incentives and political will are in place, this transition [toward renewable energy] can happen quickly,” she says, citing Uruguay’s example of achieving a near-fully renewable power system in under a decade.

Fossil fuel-producing countries, for their part, could use high oil and gas prices as an opportunity to shift courses, Yanguas Parra argues. “If managed well, revenues from high-priced periods can also help some fossil fuel exporters invest in economic diversification, workforce transition and social protection — building long-term resilience instead of deeper dependence,” she says.

What can be expected from the conference on fossil fuels?

The conference will not produce any binding agreement. However, analysts predict that it may develop a shared document on a “just, orderly, and equitable” transition away from fossil fuels, including minimum objectives and more ambitious language than that seen at previous UN climate conferences. This could serve as an initial draft of a globally shared roadmap for a gradual phaseout.

The organising committee hopes that the initial group of “willing countries” behind the Belém Declaration will expand into a broader coalition of governments, international institutions, and companies determined to lay the groundwork for moving beyond fossil fuels.

SwissInfo

swissinfo is an enterprise of the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation (SBC). Its role is to inform Swiss living abroad about events in their homeland and to raise awareness of Switzerland in other countries. swissinfo achieves this through its nine-language internet news and information platform.

  

Organisers of high-level climate summit in Colombia say 'we must transition away from fossil fuels'

Stientje van Veldhoven, Minister of Climate Policy and Green Growth of the Netherlands, embraces Colombia's Environmental Minister Irene Vélez Torres Tuesday, April 28, 2026. AP Photo/Ivan Valencia

By Emma De Ruiter

Published on 29/04/2026 - EURONEWS

The two-day segment of ministers and senior officials marks the political centerpiece of the First Conference on Transitioning away from Fossil Fuels, where more than 50 countries have been discussing how to move away from oil, gas and coal.

World leaders have gathered in Colombia's Santa Marta for the first-ever global talks to accelerate the shift away from fossil fuels, a step participating nations say is not just a climate priority but vital for energy independence.

The two-day summit of ministers and senior officials marks the political centerpiece of the First Conference on Transitioning away from Fossil Fuels, where more than 50 countries have been discussing how to move away from oil, gas and coal — the main drivers of global warming — toward cleaner energy.

The conference was announced last year after the official UN COP30 climate summit ended in Brazil, which failed to include an explicit reference to fossil fuels in its final deal.

The meeting reflects growing frustration among some governments and advocates that decades of UN climate negotiations have failed to directly address fossil fuel production, prompting the Santa Marta summit to push the issue outside formal talks.

Recent negotiations have acknowledged the need for a transition, but countries remain divided over how to implement it and how to finance the shift.

“The conclusion is unavoidable, we must transition away from fossil fuels — not just because it’s good for climate, but because it strengthens our energy independence and security,” said Stientje van Veldhoven, minister for climate policy and green growth for the Netherlands, which is co-hosting the conference with Colombia.

"We in Europe...are losing half a billion euros each day this war continues," the EU's climate envoy Wopke Hoekstra told delegates.

"We already had a very good reason to move on (from fossil fuels) for climate action...We now also have it for commercial reasons, and reasons of independence."

Energy independence in the wake of the Iran war

Organisers also say the Middle East war, which has throttled Gulf energy exports, has underscored the urgency of breaking fossil fuel dependence.

"Some people use independence, some people use sovereignty, but basically they need energy security," the UK's climate envoy Rachel Kyte told AFP in Santa Marta.

"Increasingly, the world is concluding that fossil fuels are a source of instability."

Even as record investments flow into renewable energy, scientists warn the pace is still too slow to keep global temperature rises to safer levels.

The world has already warmed about 1.4C above pre-industrial times and is tracking to blow past 1.5C in a matter of years.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro warned that “the Amazon rainforest is burning,” adding that “without it we reach a point of no return.”

He said UN climate talks have fallen short, arguing that “the unity of states has failed” and calling for broader action beyond governments.

Petro also linked current conflicts to energy dependence, saying “the wars we are seeing are driven by desperate geopolitical strategies around fossil resources.”

Activists participate in a demonstration during a conference aimed at transitioning away from fossil fuels Monday, April 27, 2026, in Santa Marta, Colombia. AP Photo/Ivan Valencia

Reducing reliance on fossil fuels a challenge

On the list of attendees are major fossil fuel producers Canada, Norway and Australia, and developing oil giants Nigeria, Angola and Brazil.

They join coal-reliant emerging markets Turkey and Vietnam, and small island nations extremely vulnerable to climate shocks, among others.

But the world's biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, including the United States, China and India, are not attending, nor are oil-rich Gulf states.

The conference is not expected to produce binding commitments but a set of proposals for countries wanting to gradually swap out fossil fuel production and consumption for cleaner forms of energy.

Activists participate in a demonstration during a conference aimed at transitioning away from fossil fuels Monday, April 27, 2026, in Santa Marta, Colombia. AP Photo/Ivan Valencia

This is a particular challenge for developing countries heavily reliant on oil and gas revenue, like hosts Colombia.

On Tuesday, France unveiled a fossil fuel "roadmap" setting deadlines to phase out coal by 2030, oil by 2045 and gas by 2050 for energy purposes.

Nations will discuss how to pursue these plans, as well as reforming fossil fuel subsidies that throw up barriers to renewable energy investment, among other issues.

Organizers say the conference is intended to build political momentum and bring together countries willing to accelerate the transition outside the formal UN process.

It is also seen as a steppingstone toward upcoming global climate negotiations, where financing and timelines for reducing fossil fuel use are expected to remain key points of debate.

EU backs ending new oil and gas drilling

By Marta Pacheco

Published on 29/04/2026 - EURONEWS

The war in the Middle East may have driven up oil and gas demand, but the world should still ditch new fossil fuel drilling, EU climate chief Wopke Hoekstra has said, insisting on "affordable, reliable, homegrown clean energy."

The world should end new fossil fuel drilling, EU Climate Action Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra has said, adding that global energy security depends on reducing oil and gas dependency.

Speaking on Tuesday at an international conference in Santa Marta, Colombia, aimed at quitting oil, gas and coal for good, the EU climate chief said that science-driven, measurable steps should be identified to support the transition from fossil fuels. "Science matters in climate change. And transitioning away from fossil fuels is a very tangible way to follow science," he said.

The First International Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, gathering 60 countries, including some major oil producers, comes at a timely moment.

Global demand for oil and natural gas has surged in the wake of the US-led war against Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade passage. Nonetheless, the European Union insists that the long-term goal of clean power is more necessary than ever.

But as EU ministers scramble to secure supplies amid soaring energy prices, some countries are considering tapping their fossil fuel reserves for a rescue.

Related

• Brazil’s Lula defends oil exploration in the Amazon as a way to finance green energy

Even before the recent market disruptions, Greece issued its first offshore oil and gas exploration license in over four decades. Italy is also considering reviving offshore oil and gas exploration, which was suspended in 2019.

Rome and Berlin have also suggested a temporary return to coal to remedy soaring electricity prices.

However, Hoekstra said the clean energy transition remained the best long-term response. "We need to reduce our fossil fuel dependence for our energy security. We cannot be at the mercy of regimes holding up our resources," he said.

"As long as we rely on fossil fuels, we are vulnerable to volatility and external pressure. What is the answer? To double down on affordable, reliable, homegrown clean energy. To move faster towards a clean, electrified energy system. For climate, but also for security, resilience, competitiveness and independence."

Hoekstra called for a doubling of energy efficiency, a tripling of renewables by 2030 and more electrification to prevent vulnerabilities to price and supply shocks from global markets.

He also said that the annual United Nations COP climate meetings were not moving fast and far enough.

"We all know that the COP process is unfortunately not always delivering what it should. That means we need to improve that. But at the same time, we also need to ensure that we make the most of these plurilateral initiatives,” he said, as he thanked Brazil for tabling the initiative to transition away from fossil fuels at the COP30 last November.

Momentum for COP31

Denmark, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom are among the European nations represented in Santa Marta, a global conference that was planned long before the conflict in the Middle East.

Rachel Kyte, the UK’s Special Representative for Climate, said the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz had forced countries around the world to pivot to clean energy, adding that the UK is eager to "support those wishing to drive forward their transitions to clean and secure energy."

Relate

“We have the experience of our transition to share and the recent experience of driving to energy security with our clean power mission," Kyte told Euronews.

Spanish Energy and Environment Minister Sara Aagesen hailed the Santa Marta gathering as a “success” that will generate alliances and consensus to sustain the momentum leading up to COP31 in Turkey.

“Fossil fuel dependency makes us incredibly vulnerable,” Aagesen said. "We need to bet on this clean energy agenda. We have our own success story, which has allowed us to be less dependent and more shielded from energy spike prices."

Seeking consensus among oil producers

Several major oil-producing nations, including Canada, Norway, Brazil and Nigeria, are taking part in Santa Marta. Others, such as the United States and Russia, were not invited due to what Colombia’s Environment Minister Irene Vélez Torres described as “openly extractivist” positions.

China, the world’s largest consumer of coal and oil, was also barred, as its status as the top global emitter would make commitments to phasing out fossil fuels particularly challenging, Torres noted.

Torres said the countries gathered in Santa Marta were a "coalition of the willing" intended to bypass the gridlock often caused by major fossil-fuel producers in UN climate talks.

Related

• Europe’s electricity grid is outdated and risks derailing fossil fuel phase out, report finds

Climate researchers at the Santa Marta event presented scientific workshops, including on the potential impact on public health and jobs in a world no longer reliant on fossil fuel production and use.

While no major new initiatives are expected to emerge from the meeting, the goal is to identify collective actions that would be difficult to achieve individually.

"We are opening a new chapter of global political discussion which, naturally, won't solve all the challenges on a single conference," Torres told reporters. "What matters here is the declaration of what we're willing to do to end fossil fuel dependency."

Europe revives renewables and nuclear to address the energy crisis

Copyright euronews

By Evi Kiorri & Mert Can Yilmaz

Published on 29/04/2026 - EURONEWS

Brussels is looking for a long-term fix, putting both renewables and nuclear back on the table after the Strait of Hormuz closure sent energy bills soaring. Watch the video!

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has caused energy prices to surge across Europe. Brussels states that the solution is to accelerate the permanent transition away from fossil fuels.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen put the cost bluntly on April 13: €22 billion in additional fossil fuel import bills in just 44 days since the US-Iran conflict began, with no extra energy to show for it.

She recommends expanding renewables and nuclear, which already provide over 70% of Europe's electricity. However, the Commission identifies key challenges: limited storage, outdated grids, and wasted clean power. Brussels is expediting its grid modernisation package for implementation this summer.

Nuclear energy has returned to the forefront of the debate, with 15 member states supporting it through the European Nuclear Alliance. There is also growing momentum to deploy Small Modular Reactors in the early 2030s.

On April 22, the Commission announced an emergency package that includes coordinated EU gas storage, joint oil reserve releases, household income support, and expedited flexible state aid rules.

This marks Europe's second major energy crisis in three years. Brussels says that the objective is not to manage future shocks, but to prevent them.

France unveils roadmap to ditch all fossil

fuels by 2050

Santa Marta (Colombia) (AFP) – France on Tuesday announced a "first of its kind" plan to phase out coal by 2030, oil by 2045 and gas by 2050 during a global conference aimed at breaking reliance on fossil fuels.


Issued on: 29/04/2026 - RFI

French refinery workers strike outside TotalEnergies’ Donges site in western France, as France now sets deadlines to phase out coal by 2030, oil by 2045 and gas by 2050. AP - Jeremias Gonzalez

The "roadmap" was published as dozens of nations gather in Santa Marta, Colombia for the first-ever international talks on how to transition away from planet-heating fossil fuels.

France's roadmap does not present new pledges but brings existing climate and energy policies and targets under one umbrella with an explicit goal.

Analysts said no other country had published such a clear and comprehensive plan and it sent an important signal at a moment when countries are reassessing their reliance on fossil fuels.

France's envoy at the conference, Benoit Faraco, said the roadmap set deadlines for the end of fossil fuel use across the economy, the second-largest in Europe.

Coal would be phased out by 2030, oil by 2045 and gas by 2050 for energy purposes, the roadmap said.

"That's quite original, because we are probably one of the rarest countries who have a clear deadline for all fossil fuel energy," he told reporters in Santa Marta.

France generates a small fraction of its electricity from fossil fuels due to its extensive nuclear power capabilities. © CLEMENT MAHOUDEAU / AFP

France only generates a fraction of its electricity from hydrocarbons, thanks to its extensive nuclear power generation.

But Faraco said the roadmap also committed to phasing out fossil fuel production, electrifying sectors like heating and transport, and helping finance the transition in other countries.

It formalises France's existing targets for reducing greenhouse gas pollution – namely to reduce emissions by five percent a year over the 2024-2028 period with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

France's cuts to greenhouse gas emissions slowed for a second straight year in 2025 and remain well below what is needed to meet its climate goals.

First mover

Fossil fuel roadmaps differ to national pledges to reduce emissions or "net zero" plans because they have an explicit end goal, said Leo Roberts, an energy analyst at the E3G think tank.

The French roadmap "self describes itself as a document that sets out of a pathway for a country to transition the whole economy away from fossil fuels," Roberts told AFP in Santa Marta.

"In that sense, it is the first of its kind."

Faraco said France decided to push ahead on its own after a proposal for a global fossil fuel roadmap was blocked at the Cop30 climate summit in November.

Demonstrators hold signs supporting the oil industry outside the international conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels, in Santa Marta, Colombia © Raul ARBOLEDA / AFP

Brazil, which was steering the climate negotiations, agreed to pursue a voluntary roadmap process instead and has asked willing countries to make submissions.

Frustration at Cop30 led to the creation of the Santa Marta conference, which is taking place outside the UN process and is being co-hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands.

Nearly 60 nations are attending, from the European Union and major fossil fuel producers Canada and Norway, to developing oil giants Angola and Nigeria and small island developing states like Tuvalu.

Nations are not expected to produce any binding commitments but a set of proposals for countries wanting to move their own economies away from fossil fuel reliance.

The conference takes place against a backdrop of soaring fuel prices and a global supply crunch stemming from the Iran war, and energy security has been a prominent theme.

Colombia conference aims for ‘more honest conversation' to speed fossil fuel exit

More than 50 countries are meeting in Colombia on Tuesday to push forward plans for phasing out planet-heating fossil fuels – with new urgency driven by geopolitical tensions.


Issued on: 28/04/2026 - RFI

A worker at the Estelar Convention Center prepares for the Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels conference in Santa Marta, Colombia. AFP - RAUL ARBOLEDA

The Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels conference, held in the Caribbean city of Santa Marta and co-hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands, will see high-level talks between ministers and climate envoys on Tuesday and Wednesday.

It comes at a tense moment, amid volatility in global energy markets triggered by the conflict in the Middle East, underlining that the transition from fossil fuels is a strategic necessity as well as an environmental one.

Strategic invitations

Participants include EU member states – Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany. Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, Sweden and France – as well as the United Kingdom, and Switzerland.

Countries from Africa, Asia and Latin America, plus small island nations on the front line of climate change, are also in attendance, as are several major fossil fuel producers with mixed climate records – including Australia, Canada, Norway, Brazil and Mexico.

Notably absent, however, are the United States, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China and India.

Colombia's Environment Minister Irene Velez takes part in an interview in Santa Marta, Colombia, on 26 April 2026, on the sidelines of the International Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels. AFP - RAUL ARBOLEDA

For Colombia’s Environment Minister Irene Velez Torres, who is spearheading the initiative, however, their absence is not a drawback.

"We didn’t expect those who are sceptical of a just transition programme to participate," she told RFI. "We invited countries that have recognised the importance and urgency of phasing out fossil fuels – in an orderly, just but also urgent manner."

By limiting participation to more committed players, organisers hope to foster what Velez Torres described as "a more honest conversation".

Analysts suggest this strategy could pay off.

Katerine Petersen of the E3G think tank argues the summit could create momentum that will eventually draw in more reluctant players.

"China doesn’t necessarily want to stay on the sidelines for long," she said. "The goal is to send the signal that this is a table where it’s strategically important to take a seat."

Financial support

A panel of leading scientists has been convened to support governments with evidence-based guidance. A preliminary report produced for the event outlines 12 possible actions, from halting new fossil fuel extraction projects to ending subsidies and tightening regulations on industry advertising.

Colombia is also using the platform to highlight its own efforts. Its government has stopped granting new hydrocarbon exploration contracts and is attempting to shift its economy away from extractive industries.

"We must now quickly replace the extractive economy with a productive economy based on other value chains," said Velez Torres. But she is candid about the scale of the challenge, noting the country still relies heavily on oil and coal revenues and must overhaul its fiscal system.

Developing nations need 'trillions' as climate finance takes centre stage at Cop28

The issue of finance looms large. Developing countries, in particular, say they cannot move forward without significant financial support.

"We cannot phase out fossil fuels without addressing the central question: who pays for the transition?" said Ryad Selmani of French NGO CCFD-Terre Solidaire, pointing to the continued profits of major energy companies.

Selma Huart of Oxfam France added that developing nations may need between $455 billion (€393 billion) and $2.4 trillion (€2 trillion) per year by 2030, compared with roughly $35 billion (€29 billion) currently available.

"Without massive, predictable, and accessible climate finance, the global phase-out of fossil fuels will remain out of reach," she warned.

Shifting global context

While no major binding agreements are expected to emerge, the conference aims to produce a report outlining practical solutions and areas of consensus ahead of the next United Nations climate summit in Turkey later this year.

We don’t expect this conference to solve all the problems," said Petersen. "But a clear outline of key actions could help countries align."

Disruptions to energy supply chains – such as the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz – have provided added impetus, driving up oil prices and exposing vulnerabilities in fossil fuel dependence.

"There are other reasons to want to move away from fossil fuels: to be less vulnerable to these crises," said climate policy researcher Nicolas Berghmans.

Around 60 countries have introduced measures linked to electrification or energy demand reduction since the latest Middle East crisis began, while others have moved to cushion consumers through subsidies or tax cuts.

The debate is increasingly framed in terms of security as well as sustainability. "Moving away from fossil fuels is not an ideological choice, but a strategic necessity," said Gaia Febvre of Climate Action Network.

Even traditionally cautious governments are adapting their message. In the UK, Energy Secretary Ed Miliband recently argued that "the era of security based on fossil fuels is over".

Rising demand

Despite growing investment in clean energy – now roughly double that of fossil fuels – coal, oil and gas still account for more than 80 percent of global energy use. Demand continues to rise, meaning new energy sources often add to, rather than replace, existing ones.

Many countries remain dependent on fossil fuels, while others still see them as a pathway to development.

Kumi Naidoo, head of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, challenges that logic.

Investing in new fossil fuel infrastructure, he argues, risks locking countries into costly and ultimately unsustainable systems. "They will end up with stranded assets… and a worse economic situation," he said.

For Velez Torres, this week's conference's aim is to ensure countries "decide that the time has come to radically advance an ecological agenda on energy and transition".

This article has been adapted from the original version in French by Géraud Bosman-Delzons,