Connect with us

Published

on

Sheep on a road in view of mobile offshore drilling units in the Port of Cromarty Firth in Cromarty, U.K., on Tuesday, June 23, 2020.
Jason Alden | Bloomberg | Getty Images

LONDON — Costa Rica and Demark are spearheading efforts to build the world’s first diplomatic alliance to manage the decline of oil and gas production.

The co-leaders of the initiative, known as the “Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance,” are seeking to establish a deadline for the end of oil and gas production that would get countries aligned with the 2015 Paris Agreement. This legally binding treaty aims to limit global heating to below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels — and preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Meeting the conditions of the agreement is widely recognized as critically important to avoid an irreversible climate crisis.

The Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance is expected to formally launch at U.N.-brokered climate talks in early November, a summit known as COP26.

Until then, Costa Rica and Demark are seeking to persuade as many countries and jurisdictions as possible to join them in bringing an end to oil and gas production.

It comes at a time when policymakers are under intense pressure to meet the demands of the climate emergency. Burning fossil fuels, such as oil and gas, is the chief driver of the climate crisis, and yet the world’s fossil fuel dependency is expected to get even worse in the coming decades.

Speaking on Thursday during an online webinar hosted by the International Renewable Energy Agency, Dan Jorgensen, minister for climate, energy and utilities for Denmark, said: “The science is clear. We cannot negotiate with nature.”

“There is no scenario in which we burn all the oil and gas that we can find and in which we stay below 2 degrees — and definitely not 1.5. It is just not possible, so we need to stop.”

They are simply inferior technologies by now. They weren’t inferior last century but, in this century, given the rise of all the other alternatives that we have, they have become inferior technologies.
Christiana Figueres
Former U.N. climate chief

Denmark pledged in December last year to end all future licensing rounds on oil and gas exploration in the North Sea and put a stop date of 2050 on oil and gas production. At that time, the relatively small European country was the largest oil producer in the European Union.

“On one hand, if you look at it, it is a huge thing to ask a country,” Jorgensen said, acknowledging the challenge of trying to persuade others to sign up to the alliance.

“What you are saying, like one of my political opponents did when I proposed this in Denmark, is: ‘So, basically you want us to say no to free money? You want us to stop pumping money out of the ground so that others can do it instead of us?'”

“And I had to say: Well, yes,” Jorgensen continued. “But it is for a good reason.”

Climate hypocrisy

Andrea Meza, environment and energy minister for Costa Rica, said on Thursday that some opposition political parties were pushing the country’s government to consider using oil and gas revenues to pay for their energy transition. “We are very clear that this is not the right pathway.”

Costa Rica, a Central American country of around 5 million people, has never extracted oil. What’s more, it is currently considering a bill to permanently ban fossil fuel exploration to ensure that no future government does so.

When asked during the same webinar why other countries would consider joining their initiative, Meza said that platforms such as the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance need to exist to show others that it is possible.

“It is just one planet,” Meza said. “This is not about doing things in the right way in the internal part of our countries and selling … all of the old technologies outside of our borders. This is not fair.”

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken (C), Costa Rica’s First Lady Claudia Dobles (L) and Costa Rican Minister of Environment and Energy Andrea Meza (R) are seen during the launch of the National Land Use, Land Cover, and Ecosystems Monitoring System (SIMOCUTE) in San Jose, on June 2, 2021.
EZEQUIEL BECERRA | AFP | Getty Images

Research published in the scientific journal Nature on Sept. 9 found that the vast majority of the world’s known fossil fuel reserves must be kept in the ground to have some hope of preventing the worst effects of climate change.

Separately, analysis published by Carbon Action Tracker on Wednesday, showed that none of the world’s major economies are currently on track to contain global heating to the Paris Agreement target of 1.5 degrees Celsius.

It follows a bombshell report from the influential, yet typically conservative, International Energy Agency earlier this year. The IEA concluded that there could be no new oil, gas or coal development if the world was to reach net zero fossil fuel emissions by 2050.

Environmental activists and Native Americans march to the construction site for the Line 3 oil pipeline near Palisade, Minnesota on January 9, 2021. Line 3 is an oil sands pipeline which runs from Hardisty, Alberta, Canada to Superior, Wisconsin in the United States.
KEREM YUCEL | AFP | Getty Images

Denmark’s Jorgensen said it would be “impolite” to name specific countries, but described it as a “paradox” that many governments were touting their commitment to net zero by 2050 while also quietly planning to extract oil and gas to sell to others. These countries include the U.S., Canada, Norway and the U.K., among others.

“You are not going to burn it yourself and you think others shouldn’t either, but you will make money selling oil to other countries? It doesn’t make sense,” he added.

Jorgensen said he did not want to dismiss the fact that signing up to the yet-to-be-revealed pledges of the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance would come with difficult economic choices, particularly those heavily reliant on oil and gas. “But, it is the tough questions that we need to ask ourselves.”

“Can we live with a future where we don’t do this? I don’t think that we can.”

‘Inferior technologies’

Speaking alongside Denmark’s Jorgensen and Costa Rica’s Meza on Thursday, former U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres addressed the urgent need for governments to dramatically scale down fossil fuel use. She cited air pollution, caused mostly by the burning of fossil fuels, which kills an estimated 7 million people worldwide every year.

Figueres also stressed that the economic imperatives for moving beyond oil and gas were compelling. “They are simply inferior technologies by now. They weren’t inferior last century but, in this century, given the rise of all the other alternatives that we have, they have become inferior technologies.”

Pipes for the Baltic Pipe gas pipeline are stacked at Houstrup Strand, near Noerre Nebel, Jutland, Denmark, on February 23, 2021. The Baltic Pipe gas pipeline, which is to come ashore at Esbjerg, on the west coast of the Jutland peninsula, will transport ten billion cubic meters of gas every year from the Norwegian gas fields in the North Sea through Denmark and to Poland.
JOHN RANDERIS HANSEN | AFP | Getty Images

An increasing number of cities banning the use of fossil fuel burning vehicles was likely to usher in “the demise of oil,” Figueres said. The end of gas production may take longer given that it is recognized as a transition fuel, she said, but still not more than 20 to 30 years as there are alternative fuels coming on the market, such as hydrogen and ammonia, “that will be able to compete favorably.”

In summary, Figueres said the economic case, “pounding” litigation in Europe and elsewhere and a social license for these fuels that has been “completely lost,” showed that there is no more space for oil and gas production.

Continue Reading

Environment

Musk complains about handouts when Tesla was only profitable due to credits

Published

on

By

Musk complains about handouts when Tesla was only profitable due to credits

Tesla’s earnings report dropped today, and news isn’t great. But instead of recognizing his failures that have led to Tesla’s downturn, CEO Elon Musk lashed out with conspiracy theories while also hypocritically failing to acknowledge that his company was only profitable this quarter due to regulatory credits.

The numbers are in on Tesla’s dismal quarter, with sales, profits and margins tanking significantly for the company despite a rising global EV market.

You’d expect a drop in car sales to be top of mind for a car company, but instead of talking about this, CEO Elon Musk opened the call by talking about his ineffective advisory role to a former reality TV host.

Musk is heading up the self-styled “Department of Government Efficiency,” an advisory group that is focused on reducing redundancy in government. The office is not an actual government department and has a redundant mission to the Government Accountability Office, which is an actual government department focused on reducing government waste.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Musk originally claimed that the department would be able to save $2 trillion for the US government, which is actually impossible because federal discretionary spending is $1.7 trillion, which is a (gets out abacus) smaller number than $2 trillion.

He has, of course, failed at this task that anyone with any level of competence would have known was impossible before setting it out for themselves, and now projects that the department will save $150 billion next year, less than a tenth of his original estimate. But even that projection is likely an overstatement, given that most of the supposed savings that DOGE has found are not actual savings at all.

On top of this, the US government’s deficit has grown to the second-highest level on record – with the first happening in 2020, the last time Mr. Trump squatted in the White House. Which means the government isn’t saving money, it is in fact borrowing and spending more of it than ever before.

So, Musk’s tenure in the advisory board has been an unmitigated failure by any realistic account.

But if you listened to Tesla’s call, you wouldn’t have known this, as Musk was quite boastful of his efforts – starting a Tesla conference call with an irrelevant rant about his fake government department, instead of with Tesla business.

He claimed that he has made “a lot of progress in addressing waste and fraud” and that the job is “mostly done,” which is not correct by his own metrics. Musk stated that his purpose is “trying to bring in the insane deficit that is leading our country, the United States, to destruction,” and as we covered above, that deficit has only increased.

But he also went on to spew some rather insane conspiracy theories about the reasons behind his company’s recent failures, all of which of course put the blame on someone else, rather than himself. The buck stops anywhere but here, I guess.

His primary assertion was that the “blowback from the time I’ve been spending in government” (which, again, is an advisory role, not an actual government position) has come mainly from protesters that were “receiving fraudulent money” and are now angry that the government money spigot has been turned off.

Which, of course, he’s provided no evidence for… and he’s provided no evidence for it because it’s false.

Besides, that’s not how protests work. But incorrect claims that protests do work that way are often used by opponents of free speech, with the motivation of putting a chilling effect public participation. Fitting behavior for an enemy of the First Amendment like Elon Musk.

Meanwhile, this assertion also comes from a person who tried and failed to bribe voters to win an election. Perhaps his admiration of Tesla protesters is aspirational – he wishes his ideas were good enough to inspire that sort of grassroots political effort that money, demonstrably, cannot buy.

But this hypocrisy extends beyond Musk’s hatred of free expression, and strikes at the heart of the business he is the titular leader of, Tesla, the organization that has made him into the richest man in the world. Because not only is it not true that Tesla protests are driven by his ineffective government actions (they are, in fact, driven by him doing Nazi stuff all the time), it’s also objectively true that Musk’s companies are a large recipient of government money.

And that’s particularly relevant today, to the very earnings call where Musk made his ridiculous assertion, because in Q1 2025, Tesla only turned a profit due to government credits. Without them, it would have lost money.

Tesla only profitable in Q1 due to regulatory credits

Per today’s earnings report, Tesla earned $595 million in regulatory credits in Q1. But its total net income for the quarter was $409 million.

This means that without those regulatory credits, Tesla would have posted a -$189 million loss in Q1. It was saved not just by credit sales, but credit sales which increased year over year – in the year-ago quarter, Tesla made $442 million in regulatory credits, despite having higher sales in Q1 2024 than in Q1 2025. So not only were credits higher, but credits per vehicle were higher.

This is a common feature of Tesla earnings, and we even said in our earnings preview that we expected it. While Tesla had a bad quarter, nobody expected it to become actually unprofitable, because there was always the possibility of increasing regulatory credit sales to eke out a profitable quarter.

And this has been the case many times in Tesla’s past, as well. In earlier times, Tesla’s first few profitable quarters were decried by the company’s opponents as an accounting trick, suggesting that regulatory credit sales weren’t “real” profits, and that the cars should have to stand on their own.

This is a silly thing to say – businesses do business in the environment that exists, and every business has an incentive structure that includes subsidies and externalities. If we were to selectively write off certain profits for certain businesses, we could make a tortured case that any business isn’t profitable.

Plus, these opponents didn’t extend the same treatment to the oil industry, which is subsidized to the tune of $760 billion per year in the US alone in unpriced externalities, yet that is somehow never mentioned during their earnings calls.

Musk has even claimed, probably correctly, that if all subsidies were eliminated both for EVs and for oil & gas, that EVs would come out ahead compared to the status quo (more recently, Musk has become one of the biggest funders of anti-EV forces, allying himself with a bought-and-paid oil stooge who is giving even more preferential treatment to the oil industry).

But, setting aside the debate over whether credits are valid profits (they are), for years now we’ve been well beyond Tesla’s reliance on credits. The company has produced significant profits, regardless of credit sales, for some time now.

At least, until today. That’s no longer true – Tesla did rely on credits to become profitable in Q1. And Musk starting the call with a ridiculous rant about government handouts not only shows his hypocrisy and projection on this matter, but his detachment from reality itself. He is, truly, too stuck in the impenetrable echo chamber of his self-congratulating twitter feed to realize what an embarrassment he’s being in public – to the point of inventing shadow enemies to explain the very real, very simple explanation that people aren’t buying his company’s cars because he sucks so much.


Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Commercial financing for EVs is way different than you think | Quick Charge

Published

on

By

Commercial financing for EVs is way different than you think | Quick Charge

No matter how badly a fleet wants to electrify their operations and take advantage of reduced fuel costs and TCO, the fact remains that there are substantial up-front obstacles to commercial EV adoption … or are there? We’ve got fleet financing expert Guy O’Brien here to help walk us through it on today’s fiscally responsible episode of Quick Charge!

This conversation was motivated by the recent uncertainty surrounding EVs and EV infrastructure at the Federal level, and how that turmoil is leading some to believe they should wait to electrify. The truth? There’s never been a better time to make the switch!

Prefer listening to your podcasts? Audio-only versions of Quick Charge are now available on Apple PodcastsSpotifyTuneIn, and our RSS feed for Overcast and other podcast players.

New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Got news? Let us know!
Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.


If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. 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. It has 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 Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Vermont sees an explosive 41% rise in EV adoption in just a year

Published

on

By

Vermont sees an explosive 41% rise in EV adoption in just a year

Vermont’s EV adoption has surged by an impressive 41% over the past year, with nearly 18,000 EVs now registered statewide.

According to data from Drive Electric Vermont and the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, 17,939 EVs were registered as of January 2025, increasing by 5,185 vehicles. Notably, over 12% of all new cars registered last year in Vermont had a plug. Additionally, used EVs are gaining popularity, accounting for about 15% of new EV registrations.

To put it in perspective, Vermont took six years to register its first 5,000 EVs – and the last 5,000 were added in just the previous year.

Rapid growth, expanding infrastructure

In just two years, Vermont has doubled its fleet of EVs, underscoring residents’ enthusiasm for electric driving. To support this surge, the state now boasts 459 public EV chargers, including 92 DC fast chargers.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The EV mix in Vermont is leaning increasingly toward BEVs, which represent 60% of the state’s EV fleet. The remaining 40% consists of PHEVs, offering flexible fuel options for drivers.

Top EV models in Vermont

Vermont’s favorite EVs in late 2024 included the Hyundai Ioniq 5, Nissan Ariya, Toyota RAV4 Prime PHEV, Tesla Model Y, and the Ford F-150 Lightning. These vehicles have appealed to Vermont drivers looking for reliability, performance, and practical features that work well in Vermont’s climate.

Leading the US in reducing emissions

This strong adoption of EVs earned Vermont the top ranking from the Natural Resources Defense Council for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in transportation in 2023. “It’s only getting easier for Vermonters to drive electric,” noted Michele Boomhower, Vermont’s Department of Transportation director. She emphasized the growing variety of EV models, including electric trucks and SUVs with essential features like all-wheel drive, crucial for Vermont’s climate and terrain.

Local dealerships boost EV accessibility

Nucar Automall, an auto dealer in St. Albans, is a great example of local support driving this trend. With help from Efficiency Vermont’s EV dealer incentives – receiving $25,000 through the EV Readiness Incentive program – it recently installed 15 EV chargers for new buyers and existing drivers to use.

“Having these chargers on the lot makes it easier for customers to see just how simple charging an EV can be,” said Ryan Ortiz, general manager at Nucar Automall. Ortiz also pointed out the growing affordability of EVs, thanks to more models becoming available and an increase in pre-owned EVs coming off leases.

Read more: Vermont becomes the first US state to pass a law requiring Big Oil to pay for climate damage


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