Connect with us

Published

on

The oil and gas industry is banking on carbon capture as its “fix” for climate change. The IEA’s new report dispels that idea and offers real solutions.

The oil and gas sector currently accounts for just 1% of clean energy investment globally. A special report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) released ahead of the COP28 climate summit explores how the fossil fuel industry “can take a more responsible approach and contribute positively to the new energy economy.”

In other words, the fossil fuel industry needs to get on the renewables bandwagon now, and not with large-scale carbon capture. The IEA provides a roadmap in its new report, “The Oil and Gas Industry in Net Zero Transitions.”

Global demand for both oil and gas is set to peak by 2030, if not by 2025. If governments deliver in full on their national energy and climate pledges, demand will fall 45% below today’s level by 2050. In a pathway to reaching net zero emissions by mid-century, which is necessary to keep the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C within reach, oil and gas use will decline by more than 75% by 2050.

Or, to spell it out in monetary terms, the report’s analysis finds that the current valuation of private oil and gas companies could fall by 25% from $6 trillion today if all national energy and climate goals are reached, and by up to 60% if the world gets on track to limit global warming to 1.5C.

The status quo is impossible

Every oil and gas company’s transition strategy can and should include a plan to reduce emissions from its own operations, asserts the report – yet companies with targets to reduce their emissions account for less than 50% of global oil and gas output.

The IEA also points out that carbon capture can’t be used as a linchpin by the fossil fuel industry to maintain the status quo. If oil and natural gas consumption were to evolve as projected under today’s policy settings, limiting the temperature rise to 1.5C would require an “entirely inconceivable” 32 billion tonnes of carbon captured for utilization or storage by 2050, including 23 billion tonnes via direct air capture.

The amount of electricity needed to power these technologies would be greater than the entire world’s electricity demand today.

IEA executive director Fatih Birol said:

With the world suffering the impacts of a worsening climate crisis, continuing with business as usual is neither socially nor environmentally responsible.

The [oil and gas] industry needs to commit to genuinely helping the world meet its energy needs and climate goals – which means letting go of the illusion that implausibly large amounts of carbon capture are the solution.

How to be part of the solution

The report finds that the oil and gas sector is well placed to scale up some crucial technologies for transitions to clean energy, such as offshore wind and geothermal energy. It’s going to have to change tack in many other aspects of its business, too. It needs to increase investment in EV charging facilities – turn the gas stations into EV stations. The sector can also move further into the plastics recycling industry as global bans on plastic continue to grow.

Further, the production, transport, and processing of oil and gas results in nearly 15% of global energy-related emissions – equal to the US’s entire energy-related emissions. The fossil fuel industry’s emissions must decline by 60% by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5C by 2050. The emissions intensity of oil and gas producers with the highest emissions is currently five to 10 times above those with the lowest, showing the vast potential for improvements. So it needs to boost efficiency and electrify its facilities across the sector.

Reducing emissions from methane, which accounts for half of the total emissions from oil and gas operations, would also provide a big win, as methane reduction strategies are well-known and inexpensive.

The oil and gas industry invested around $20 billion in clean energy in 2022, or roughly 2.5% of its total capital spending. It can and must do a lot better. To align with the Paris Agreement, the IEA says, it must put 50% of its capital expenditures towards clean energy projects by 2030, on top of the investment required to reduce emissions from its operations.

Not only is it imperative that the fossil fuel sector shifts gears to limit global warming – it’s also good business.

Photo: “Coal power plant” by eutrophication&hypoxia is licensed under CC BY 2.0.


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –ad*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Russia’s struggling war economy might be what finally drives Moscow to the negotiating table

Published

on

By

Russia’s struggling war economy might be what finally drives Moscow to the negotiating table

Russian President Vladimir Putin tours an exhibition at the Central Museum of the Great Patriotic War on Poklonnaya Gora in Moscow, Russia, April 30, 2025.

Alexander Kazakov | Via Reuters

Russia has shown little appetite for peace negotiations with Ukraine, despite Moscow making a show of what war experts described as “performative ceasefires,” and a number of attempts by U.S. President Donald Trump to persuade Russian leader Vladimir Putin to talk to Kyiv.

In fact, Moscow is widely believed to be planning a new summer offensive in Ukraine to consolidate territorial gains in the southern and eastern parts of the country, that its forces partially occupy. If successful, the offensive could give Russia more leverage in any future talks.

While Russia seems reluctant to pursue peace now, increasing economic and military pressures at home — ranging from supplies of military hardware and recruitment of soldiers, to sanctions on revenue-generating exports like oil — could be the factors that eventually drive Moscow to the negotiating table.

“Russia will seek to intensify offensive operations to build pressure during negotiations, but the pressure cannot be sustained indefinitely,” Jack Watling, senior research fellow for Land Warfare at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London, said in analysis Tuesday.

Russian stockpiles of military equipment left over from the Soviet era, including tanks, artillery and infantry fighting vehicles, will be running out between now and mid-fall, Watling said, meaning that Russia’s ability to replace losses will be entirely dependent on what it can produce from scratch.

“At the same time, while Russia can fight another two campaign seasons with its current approach to recruitment, further offensive operations into 2026 will likely require further forced mobilisation, which is both politically and economically challenging,” Watling surmised.

CNBC has contacted the Kremlin for a response to the comments and is awaiting a reply.

Economy slowing

In the meantime, dark clouds are gathering on the horizon when it comes to Russia’s war-focused economy, which has labored under the weight of international sanctions as well as homegrown pressures, also largely resulting from war, such as rampant inflation and high food and production costs that even Putin described as “alarming.”

Russia’s central bank (CBR) has stood the course of keeping interest rates high (at 21%) in a bid to lower the rate of inflation, which stood at 10.2% in April. The CBR said in May that a disinflationary process is underway but that “a prolonged period of tight monetary policy” is still required for inflation to return to its target of 4% in 2026. In the meantime, a marked slowdown in the Russian economy has surprised some economists.

“The sharp slowdown in Russian gross domestic product growth from 4.5% year-on-year in the fourth quarter, to 1.4% in the first quarter is consistent with a sharp fall in output and suggests that the economy may be heading for a much harder landing than we had expected,” Liam Peach, senior emerging markets economist at Capital Economics commented last week.

“Such a sharp drop in GDP growth has surprised us, although we had expected a slowdown to take hold this year,” he noted, adding that “a technical recession is possible over the first half of the year and GDP growth over 2025 as a whole could come in significantly below our current forecast of 2.5%.”

In this pool photograph distributed by Russian state agency Sputnik, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin visits Uralvagonzavod, the country’s main tank factory in the Urals, in Nizhny Tagil, on Feb. 15, 2024.

Ramil Sitdikov | Afp | Getty Images

The growth that remains in the Russian economy is concentrated in manufacturing, specifically the defense sector and related industries, and is being fueled by state spending, according to Alexander Kolyandr, senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis.

“After three years of militarizing the country, Russia’s economy is cooling,” he said in online analysis for CEPA, noting that the slowdown in inflation, less borrowing by companies and consumers, declining imports, industrial output and consumer spending all pointed to the slowdown continuing.

That’s not disputed by Russian officials, with the Economic Development Ministry predicting that economic growth will slow from 4.3% in 2024 to 2.5% this year.

“The economy is not demobilizing; it is just running out of steam. That said, a drop can easily become a dive. Bad decisions by policymakers, a further dip in oil prices, or carelessness with inflation, and Russia could find itself in trouble,” Kolyandr said.

Sanctions and oil price bite

What’s particularly starting to hurt Russia are factors beyond its control, including tighter sanctions on Russia’s “shadow fleet” (vessels illicitly transporting oil in a bid to evade sanctions enacted following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine) and a decline in oil prices as a result of Trump’s global tariffs policy that is hitting demand.

On Thursday, benchmark Brent futures with a July expiry stood at $64.94 a barrel while frontmonth July U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude was at $61.65. The last spot price of a barrel of Urals crude oil, Russia’s benchmark, was at $59.97, according to LSEG data.

At the start of 2025, Brent was trading at $74.64 per barrel, while WTI and Urals crude were trading at $75.13 and $70.04, respectively.

Russia’s finance ministry said in April that it expects 24% lower revenues from oil and gas this year, compared to earlier estimates, and lowered its oil price forecast from $69.7 to $56 per barrel. The ministry also raised the 2025 budget deficit estimate to 1.7% of GDP, from a previous forecast of 0.5%.

FILE PHOTO: Crude oil tanker Nevskiy Prospect, owned by Russia’s leading tanker group Sovcomflot, transits the Bosphorus in Istanbul, Turkey September 6, 2020. 

Yoruk Isik | Reuters

A lower oil price will “severely limit Russian revenue while its reserves are becoming depleted,” RUSI’s analyst Watling remarked.

“More aggressive enforcement against Russia’s shadow fleet and the continuation of Ukraine’s deep strike campaign could reduce the liquid capital that has so far allowed Russia to steadily increase defence production and offer massive bonuses for volunteers joining the military,” he said.

If Western allies can maintain and strengthen efforts to degrade Russia’s economy, and Ukraine’s forces “deny Russia from reaching the borders of Donetsk [in eastern Ukraine] between now and Christmas,” then “Moscow will face hard choices about the costs it is prepared to incur for continuing the war.”

“Under such conditions the Russians may move from Potemkin negotiations to actually negotiating,” Watling said.

Continue Reading

Environment

White House crypto czar David Sacks says stablecoin bill will unlock ‘trillions’ for U.S. Treasury

Published

on

By

White House crypto czar David Sacks says stablecoin bill will unlock 'trillions' for U.S. Treasury

U.S. President Donald Trump sits next to Crypto czar David Sacks at the White House Crypto Summit at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 7, 2025.

Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters

President Donald Trump‘s top crypto and AI advisor David Sacks said Wednesday that the administration expects the stablecoin legislation moving through the Senate to pass with “significant bipartisan support,” and claimed it could unlock demand for U.S. Treasuries.

“We already have over $200 billion in stablecoins — it’s just unregulated,” Sacks told CNBC’s “Closing Bell Overtime.” “If we provide the legal clarity and legal framework for this, I think we could create trillions of dollars of demand for our Treasuries practically overnight, very quickly.”

The GENIUS Act — a bill to regulate stablecoins — cleared a key procedural vote in the Senate. With 15 Democrats voting for the bill to pass the cloture threshold this week, the proponents have the votes necessary to avoid a filibuster.

“We have every expectation now that it’s going to pass,” added Sacks, though he didn’t answer a question about concerns from Democrats that there aren’t sufficient safeguards in place to keep the president and his family from profiting from legislation.

Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro

Democrats previously rejected the GENIUS Act in part on concern that President Trump’s personal cryptocurrency ventures, including his own meme coin and a stablecoin from his family’s crypto business, created an unprecedented conflict of interest.

Unlike digital assets such as bitcoin, which can trade wildly, stablecoins are a subset of cryptocurrencies whose value is tied to that of a real-world asset, like the U.S. dollar. Bitcoin hit a new record on Wednesday, nearing $110,000.

Tether, which is banked by Cantor Fitzgerald in the U.S., controls more than 60% of the stablecoin market. Deutsche Bank found that stablecoin transactions hit $28 trillion last year, surpassing that of Mastercard and Visa, combined.

Sacks, who has emerged as a powerful policy voice inside Trump’s inner circle, framed the GENIUS Act not just as a crypto breakthrough but as a national economic strategy.

“Stablecoins offer a new, more efficient, cheaper, smoother payment system — new payment rails for the U.S. economy,” he said. “It also extends the dominance of the dollar online.”

The White House has aggressively backed the effort, even as concerns mount over the president’s potential conflicts.

While Sacks sold $200 million in crypto-related holdings before taking his White House job according to a disclosure filing, Trump and his family have been leaning into building a crypto empire.

The Trumps are financial backers of World Liberty Financial, which just launched its own stablecoin — USD1 — backed by Treasuries and dollar deposits.

Abu Dhabi’s MGX investment fund recently pledged $2 billion in USD1 to Binance, the world’s largest digital assets exchange. It’s the company’s largest-ever investment made in crypto.

Still, the path to passage isn’t entirely smooth. Senator Josh Hawley, R-Mo., added a controversial rider to the bill that would cap credit card late fees — what’s seen as a poison pill that could alienate banking allies and stall final approval.

WATCH: Trump’s growing crypto empire raising conflict of interest concerns

Trump's growing crypto empire raising conflict of interest concerns

Continue Reading

Environment

Trump wants to kill ENERGY STAR – here’s how that impacts you

Published

on

By

Trump wants to kill ENERGY STAR – here's how that impacts you

The Trump administration wants to pull the plug on ENERGY STAR, the federal program behind those familiar blue labels on energy-efficient appliances, homes, and buildings. Launched in 1992, ENERGY STAR has saved Americans more than $500 billion in energy costs while slashing greenhouse gas emissions.

To dig into what this means for everyday Americans, we spoke with Rebecca Foster, CEO of clean energy nonprofit Vermont Energy Investment Corporation (VEIC), which has spent decades working to make homes, schools, and businesses more energy efficient.

Electrek: What is the ENERGY STAR program, and what are the benefits for consumers?

Rebecca Foster: It’s simple: ENERGY STAR helps customers and businesses save energy and reduce costs. The program does this by clearly labeling which products are energy-efficient options. It’s a certification of confidence – it does not dictate efficiency standards. The program was created in 1992 by President George H.W. Bush and has enjoyed decades of bipartisan support. 

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The brand has become the backbone of energy efficiency across the country. ENERGY STAR is a recognized and reliable mark of efficient appliances and electronics that lower costs and improve indoor air quality. The ENERGY STAR label has also expanded to include efficiency standards for weatherizing homes and certifying when new buildings are constructed to high efficiency standards. Utilities benefit from ENERGY STAR, too – with more efficient appliances and systems plugged in, they are better able to manage the grid and decrease costs for customers.

The main benefit to consumers is significant savings through energy efficiency. A typical home can save around $450 a year on their energy bills by choosing ENERGY STAR-certified products, according to a Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimate. Lower-income households spend a greater proportion of their budget on energy, so losing that savings will be felt especially hard by these families. Energy efficiency programs that VEIC administers, including Efficiency Vermont, Efficiency Smart, and the DC Sustainable Energy Utility, have incorporated ENERGY STAR certifications into their rebates and educational materials for decades. The ENERGY STAR certification is an easy way to let people know which products are eligible for rebates and encourage folks to choose the more efficient option by making it more affordable with incentives. Combined, these programs have delivered more than $694 million in customer incentives since 2000, resulting in over $5.6 billion in lifetime customer savings. 

Evaluations of the ENERGY STAR program show it saves US households about $40 billion a year nationwide – and has delivered about $500 billion in savings since it began. All for a program that costs the government just $30 million annually. According to the Consortium for Energy Efficiency‘s 2022 survey, where I worked for over a decade prior to joining VEIC, nearly 90% of US households report recognizing the ENERGY STAR label and almost half (45%) report knowingly purchasing an ENERGY STAR-certified product or home within the last 12 months.

Electrek: How would ending the ENERGY STAR program hurt consumers at a national and regional level?

Rebecca Foster: Efficiency labels and education from ENERGY STAR leads to more affordable energy bills for customers. Ending the program means less clarity and guidance for how to choose the more efficient option, which means higher costs month after month. Households are increasingly opting for more efficient, all-electric clean technologies like cold climate heat pumps for heating/cooling and EVs for their transportation needs. That means efficiency will become even more important for households to maintain lower electricity use. So, losing ENERGY STAR now will really cost Americans more in the short and long term.

Regionally and on a local level, getting rid of ENERGY STAR could disrupt energy efficiency programs run by states, utilities, and third-party administrators that rely on the ENERGY STAR label for rebates. It could also hurt manufacturers, distributors, and contractors who have built their businesses around providing and installing more efficient equipment. Existing lists of qualified products will quickly become out of date as new models and new technology enter the market. We could see programs in different states or run by different entities come up with confusing or competing standards for their rebates, making it more difficult for people to save energy. 

All of these impacts hurt consumers, especially at a time when families and businesses are already struggling to keep up with rising costs. 

Electrek: What sort of impact would ending this program have on the grid?

Rebecca Foster: A stable electric grid is more important than ever as we see growing electricity demand due to data centers and AI and an increasing reliance on electricity to meet more of our daily needs. ENERGY STAR has been the backbone of energy efficiency across the country for decades, and it’s delivered the more efficient lighting, appliances, and heating systems that are in use today in countless homes. Efficiency is a major reason why US electricity demand has been flat for the last two decades, according to the EIA.

As we see the electrification of our transportation and heating sectors, we’re also going to see unprecedented growth in electricity demand – an 11% increase in New England alone over the next decade, according to ISO New England. That’s part of a 50% increase in demand nationally by 2050, according to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association.

Losing ENERGY STAR would slow down and complicate management of the grid because efficiency contributes to a stable and optimized grid. It also helps avoid the costly expansion of transmission projects by reducing demand without asking customers to make large behavioral changes. 

A more efficient grid can also avoid investing in new fossil fuel power generation, like natural gas power plants, helping meet state and regional goals for clean energy and emissions reductions. ENERGY STAR is a great tool for realizing an efficient, electrified future. Ending the program will put a greater burden on grid operators and utilities by taking away one of the most effective tools in the toolbox for addressing rising energy demand: customer participation.

Rebecca Foster is VEIC’s CEO. Heading up the executive leadership team, Rebecca guides the nonprofit’s strategic planning, business development, and performance across its contracts nationwide. With nearly 25 years of experience in the clean energy industry, Rebecca is a seasoned leader dedicated to the organization’s mission of generating the energy solutions the world needs.

VEIC is a national clean energy nonprofit that delivers high-impact energy solutions focused on equity and innovation. Since 1986, VEIC has been recognized as a leader in decarbonization strategies, working with governments, utilities, foundations, and businesses to reduce GHG emissions and create a sustainable energy system that benefits everyone.


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending