You are here

Climate Code Red

Subscribe to Climate Code Red feed
Climate code redDavid Spratt
Updated: 3 days 16 hours ago

Over half of all fossil fuels are extracted by just seven countries, as world heads to 3°C of warming

Sun, 11/27/2022 - 16:49

Shane White from has put together three very useful charts breaking down coal, oil and gas extraction by nation. 

And the bottom line? The charts show that in 2021, just over half of all fossil fuels was extracted by just seven countries:

  • China
  • USA
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Russia
  • Canada
  • Iraq, and  
  • Iran.

At a glance:

  • Coal: China alone accounted for just over half of total world coal production in 2021, and 11 countries produced 1% or more accounting for 93.7%.
  • Oil: Five countries accounted for just over half (US, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Canada and Iraq). 19 countries produced 1% or more accounting for 87.8% of 2021 world total oil production.
  • Gas: Four countries produced just over half (US, Russia, Iran and China). 18 countries produced 1% or more accounting for 84.4% of 2021 world total gas production.

It should also be noted that not all fossil fuel extracted is combusted. A small proportion is sued as feedstock for manufacturing processes.

For more charts and analysis of global energy use, go to

The latest International Energy Agency projections show that global carbon emissions from energy will peak in 2025 (assuming the implementation of Nationally Determined Ccontributions including "conditional elements" under the Paris Agreement) , but are likely to plateau after that for a decade, rather than decline in any significant manner.  “Global coal use and emissions have essentially plateaued at a high level, with no definitive signs of an imminent reduction,” it concluded.

This reflects the evidence that new renewable energy capacity is not making significant inroads into the quantity of emissions from fossil-fuel based energy systems, but is providing around the amount of energy required to cover the extra demand due to economic growth. As atmospheric levels of all three greenhouse gases hit record highs, what does this mean for future warming and the Paris Agreement commitments? 

The warming trend will reach 1.5°C around 2030, irrespective of any emission reduction initiatives taken in the meantime. This is because short-term warming short-term warming is largely determined by past emissions, and the inertia in the energy and political systems. 

Alan Kohler writes that: “Keeping warming to 1.5 degrees now looks impossible, and according to [Prof.] David Karoly, one of Australia’s leading climate scientists, there’s an 80 per cent chance of 2 degrees, while 3 degrees is 50/50.” The UN Environment Program also says there is no longer a credible path to holding warming below 1.5°C in the short term.

Keeping warming to 2°C means in general terms having to halve emissions each decade from 2020 to 2050, known as the “carbon law”.  But emissions and greenhouse gas levels are still rising, and the 2°C target will be missed by a significant margin. The 2°C is likely before 2050 even with higher-ambition emission reductions. 

When all system feedbacks are assessed, current emission-reduction commitments will lead to around 3°C of warming, which US security analysts conclude may result in a world of “outright chaos”. And six in ten climate scientists surveyed by Nature journal say that they expect the world to warm by at least 3°C by the end of the century.

Categories: I. Climate Science

Brace for impact. International aviation Net Zero 2050 flightpath crashes in Melbourne.

Sat, 11/19/2022 - 13:37

by Mark Carter, Flight Free Australia

This week Flight Free Australia and Extinction Rebellion picketed the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Slot Conference in Melbourne to protest the airport and airline fossil fuel industry’s emissions expansion plans.

[A landing slot is permission for an airline to take off and land a particular regular flight at an airport.]

Right now we’re the middle of the climate emergency.  

Right now, Melbourne Airport wants to increase its flight emissions by around 60%, creating an extra 160 million tonnes — 50 times more than they admit — by 2046 from flights enabled by its proposed third runway.

Right now, the Melbourne–Sydney flight path is the second most emissions intensive route, per kilometre, on the planet.

Right now, flying is the most single worst thing you can do for global warming, and its impact is three times three times greater than the industry admits.

Right now, they plan on growing four percent every year. 

At the same time, the world is meeting at COP27 because rapid emissions reductions are necessary. 

At the same time, the uncompromised science tells us that we can burn no more carbon for an acceptable probability of avoiding climate chaos. We need to stop burning fossil fuels today. ASAP. The quicker the better.

What then is IATA’s emissions reduction response to our climate reality? It’s Net Zero 2050. It’s ongoing emissions out to 2050 and beyond. It’s a climate-crash flightpath. 

According to the IPCC, Net Zero 2050 has a less than 50:50 chance of a safe landing. As low as a one in three chance of preventing 1.5ºC of warming — that the world has said we must prevent. Are our governments acknowledging this risk? Are our media reporting this risk? Would you get on a plane that was more than likely to crash? 

For an industry that prides itself on safety, Net Zero 2050 is an insanely risky trajectory. 

But even Net Zero 2050’s emissions reductions are massively overstated. Some are supposed to come from the use of alternative fuels. But they can’t replace avgas across the global fleet for decades, if ever. They won’t be emissions free even then, because they only work in a blend with fossil fuel, and still create non-CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions — including contrails — that are twice as warming as CO2 alone (as does even green hydrogen). And deducting the carbon already in the fuel stock doesn't make burning it emissions free. They are not “sustainable” aviation fuels. 

Net Zero 2050’s emissions reductions are also supposed to come from offsetting flight emissions against carbon drawdown. But massive carbon draw down is needed now to cool an already disastrously hot planet. So stealing it for offsetting is a crime. 

And yes, thankfully renewables powered short haul electric flights may be possible in the years to come. But that can't excuse ongoing emissions in the meantime. 

The Net Zero 2050 pathway is seriously dangerous greenwash. It won’t prevent 2ºC of warming. 

Yet look who’s onboard this climate crash flightpath. Look who’s signed up to Net Zero 2050. Alongside IATA, there’s Qantas, there’s Virgin Australia, there’s your industry super fund through Melbourne Airport shareholder IFM Investors, there’s the taxpayer funded Future Fund, another Melbourne Airport shareholder, there’s our Victorian government. And there’s our federal government with its recent support for an unsustainable Sustainable Aviation Fuel industry. And they want us to join them.

Unfortunately, to cut aviation emissions we need to get to the emergency exit. Massive and rapid reductions in flight demand are the only way we can get to a safer destination. The IATA Slot Conference should be rapidly and massively cutting slots, cutting flight numbers, until they’re emissions free. Or we fry. Not fly. Fry.  

Staying on the ground is a massive challenge. Yes, it’ll be difficult. But it will be far, far, far, easier than struggling to survive climate chaos and collapsing life support systems. We can make rail travel better and faster, if we want it. We can voluntarily restrain ourselves, if we want to. We can choose to regulate flight reductions if we want to.

But are our leaders actually up for the challenge? Will they really continue to prioritise saving an inequitable economy, or anything else for that matter, over saving our life support systems? Will they really choose to sign, as UN Secretary General Guterres warns, a collective suicide pact?

It’s time to disembark IATA’s Net Zero 2050 flight.

More information:

Categories: I. Climate Science

The Fine Print I:

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.

Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.

The Fine Print II:

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.

It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.