2°C temperature threshold puts oil investments at risk

5th June 2014


Related Topics

Related tags

  • Mitigation ,
  • Conventional ,
  • Energy

Author

Paola Reason

Shell says demand for fossil fuels will remain buoyant and continue to attract a high price.

Investment worth $1.1 trillion in oil projects are at risk up to 2025 if the increase in global temperatures is to be kept below the critical 2ºC threshold. Scientists believe that any rise greater than that caused by oil being being burned could trigger dangerous climate change.

The warning comes in a new report from financial specialists the Carbon Tracker Initiative (CTI). It says projects that require the price of a barrel of oil to be at least $95 over the next 10 years will be increasingly nonviable due to tougher climate policies and advances in vehicle technology, for example, that will cut demand for oil. Concern is raised mainly about projects that involve extracting unconventional types of hydrocarbons, such as shale oil and oil sands, or operating in physically-demanding environments, such as ultra deepwater and the Arctic. In his foreword to the report, CTI chief executive Anthony Hobley warns: “Either policy or technological tipping points will reduce demand … or we will face levels of warming described as catastrophic by many.”

The CTI has developed a “carbon supply cost curve” to identify the oil projects most at risk. Its analysis assumes that oil will have a 40% share of a carbon budget necessary to keep the temperature rise below 2ºC and builds on its previous work on “unburnable carbon”. Assuming this share remains constant, the CTI estimates that total emissions from the oil industry will be pegged at 360 giga tonnes of CO2, which is equivalent to 760 billion barrels of oil. If so, only oil that can be extracted for a market price of $75 per barrel or less will remain viable. To avoid wasted capital, the CTI advises investors to only finance projects at the low end of the cost curve. “There is a realisation that ignoring climate risk and hoping it will go away is no longer an acceptable risk management strategy for investment institutions,” writes Hobley.

The CTI research places Shell fourth – behind Petrobas, ExxonMobil and Rosneft – in its list of oil companies with the highest total capital expenditure exposure over the next 10 years in projects above the $95 per barrel market price. However, Shell does not believe any of its proven reserves will be non-performing or become “stranded assets”.

In a letter to stakeholders, Shell acknowledged the need to tackle climate change, but said: “Energy demand growth, in our view, will lead to fossil fuels continuing to play a major role in the energy system – accounting for 40–60% of energy supply in 2050 and beyond, for example. The huge investment required to provide energy is expected to require high energy prices, and not [a] drastic price drop.”

CTI responded: “Shell does not explain how it is solving the contradiction between the predictions of high oil demand and its acceptance of the need to address climate change. [We] argue that high-cost production and growing oil demand assumptions are inconsistent with a more resilient global economy and stable global climate.”
The House of Commons’ environmental audit committee warned in March that global financial markets were in danger of creating a “carbon bubble” due to the over-valuing of fossil fuel assets. “Financial stability could be threatened if shares in fossil fuel companies turn out to be overvalued because the bulk of their oil, coal and gas reserves cannot be burned without further destabilising the climate,” said Joan Walley, chair of the EAC.

The MPs said the government must ensure investors have all of the information they require to assess carbon risk.

Subscribe

Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.


Transform articles

SBTi clarifies that ‘no change has been made’ to its stance on offsetting

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has issued a statement clarifying that no changes have been made to its stance on offsetting scope 3 emissions following a backlash.

16th April 2024

Read more

While there is no silver bullet for tackling climate change and social injustice, there is one controversial solution: the abolition of the super-rich. Chris Seekings explains more

4th April 2024

Read more

One of the world’s most influential management thinkers, Andrew Winston sees many reasons for hope as pessimism looms large in sustainability. Huw Morris reports

4th April 2024

Read more

Alex Veitch from the British Chambers of Commerce and IEMA’s Ben Goodwin discuss with Chris Seekings how to unlock the potential of UK businesses

4th April 2024

Read more

Regulatory gaps between the EU and UK are beginning to appear, warns Neil Howe in this edition’s environmental legislation round-up

4th April 2024

Read more

Five of the latest books on the environment and sustainability

3rd April 2024

Read more

Ben Goodwin reflects on policy, practice and advocacy over the past year

2nd April 2024

Read more

In 2020, IEMA and the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFoA) jointly wrote and published A User Guide to Climate-Related Financial Disclosures. This has now been updated to include three key developments in the field.

2nd April 2024

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close