The world’s fossil-fuel use is still on track to peak before 2030, despite a surge in political support for coal, oil and gas, according to data from the International Energy Agency (IEA).
The IEA’s latest World Energy Outlook 2025, published during the opening days of the COP30 climate summit in Brazil, shows coal at or close to a peak, with oil set to follow around 2030 and gas by 2035, based on the stated policy intentions of the world’s governments.
Under the same assumptions, the IEA says that clean-energy use will surge, as nuclear power rises 39% by 2035, solar by 344% and wind by 178%.
Still, the outlook has some notable shifts since last year, with coal use revised up by around 6% in the near term, oil seeing a shallower post-peak decline and gas plateauing at higher levels.
This means that the IEA expects global warming to reach 2.5C this century if “stated policies” are implemented as planned, up marginally from 2.4C in last year’s outlook.
In addition, after pressure from the Trump administration in the US, the IEA has resurrected its “current policies scenario”, which – effectively – assumes that governments around the world abandon their stated intentions and only policies already set in legislation are continued.
If this were to happen, the IEA warns, global warming would reach 2.9C by 2100, as oil and gas demand would continue to rise and the decline in coal use would proceed at a slower rate.
This year’s outlook also includes a pathway that limits warming to 1.5C in 2100, but says that this would only be possible after a period of “overshoot”, where temperature rise peaks at 1.65C.
The IEA will publish its “announced pledges scenario” at a later date, to illustrate the impact of new national climate pledges being implemented on time and in full.
(See Carbon Brief’s coverage of previous IEA world energy outlooks from 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015.)
World energy outlook
The IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook (WEO) is published every autumn. It is regarded as one of the most influential annual contributions to the understanding of energy and emissions trends.
The outlook explores a range of scenarios, representing different possible futures for the global energy system. These are developed using the IEA’s “global energy and climate model”.
The latest report stresses that “none of [these scenarios] should be regarded as a forecast”.
However, this year’s outlook marks a major shift in emphasis between the scenarios – and it reintroduces a pathway where oil and gas demand continues to rise for many decades.
This pathway is named the “current policies scenario” (CPS), which assumes that governments abandon their planned policies, leaving only those that are already set in legislation.
If the world followed this path, then global temperatures would reach 2.9C above pre-industrial levels by 2100 and would be “set to keep rising from there”, the IEA says.
The CPS was part of the annual outlook until 2020, when the IEA said that it was “difficult to imagine” such a pathway “prevailing in today’s circumstances”.
It has been resurrected following heavy pressure from the US, which is a major funder of the IEA that accounts for 14% of the agency’s budget.
For example, in July Politico reported “a ratcheted-up US pressure campaign” and “months of public frustrations with the IEA from top Trump administration officials”. It noted:
“Some Republicans say the IEA has discouraged investment in fossil fuels by publishing analyses that show near-term peaks in global demand for oil and gas.”
The CPS is the first scenario to be discussed in detail in the report, appearing in chapter three. The CPS similarly appears first in Annex A, the data tables for the report.
The second scenario is the “stated policies scenario” (STEPS), featured in chapter four of this year’s outlook. Here, the outlook also includes policies that governments say they intend to bring forward and that the IEA judges as likely to be implemented in practice.
In this world, global warming would reach 2.5C by 2100 – up marginally from the 2.4C expected in the 2024 edition of the outlook.
Beyond the STEPS and the CPS, the outlook includes two further scenarios.
One is the “net-zero emissions by 2050” (NZE) scenario, which illustrates how the world’s energy system would need to change in order to limit warming in 2100 to 1.5C.
The NZE was first floated in the 2020 edition of the report and was then formally featured in 2021.
The report notes that, unlike in previous editions, this scenario would see warming peak at more than 1.6C above pre-industrial temperatures, before returning to 1.5C by the end of the century.
This means it would include a high level of temporary “overshoot” of the 1.5C target. The IEA explains that this results from the “reality of persistently high emissions in recent years”. It adds:
“In addition to very rapid progress with the transformation of the energy sector, bringing the temperature rise back down below 1.5C by 2100 also requires widespread deployment of CO2 removal technologies that are currently unproven at large scale.”
Finally, the outlook includes a new scenario where everyone in the world is able to gain access to electricity by 2035 and to clean cooking by 2040, named “ACCESS”.
While the STEPS appears second in the running order of the report, it is mentioned slightly more frequently than the CPS, as shown in the figure below. The CPS is a close second, however, whereas the IEA’s 1.5C pathway (NZE) receives a declining level of attention.
US critics of the IEA have presented its stated policies scenario as “disconnected from reality”, in contrast to what they describe as the “likely scenario” of “business as usual”.
Yet the current policies scenario is far from a “business-as-usual” pathway. The IEA says this explicitly in an article published ahead of the outlook:
“The CPS might seem like a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario, but this terminology can be misleading in an energy system where new technologies are already being deployed at scale, underpinned by robust economics and mature, existing policy frameworks. In these areas, ‘business as usual’ would imply continuing the current process of change and, in some cases, accelerating it.”
In order to create the current policies scenario, where oil and gas use continues to surge into the future, the IEA therefore has to make more pessimistic assumptions about barriers to the uptake of new technologies and about the willingness of governments to row back on their plans. It says:
“The CPS…builds on a narrow reading of today’s policy settings…assuming no change, even where governments have indicated their intention to do so.”
This is not a scenario of “business as usual”. Instead, it is a scenario where countries around the world follow US president Donald Trump in dismantling their plans to shift away from fossil fuels.
More specifically, the current policies scenario assumes that countries around the world renege on their policy commitments and fail to honour their climate pledges.
For example, it assumes that Japan and South Korea fail to implement their latest national electricity plans, that China fails to continue its power-market reforms and abandons its provincial targets for clean power, that EU countries fail to meet their coal phase-out pledges and that US states such as California fail to extend their clean-energy targets.
Similarly, it assumes that Brazil, Turkey and India fail to implement their greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes (ETS) as planned and that China fails to expand its ETS to other industries.
The scenario also assumes that the EU, China, India, Australia, Japan and many others fail to extend or continue strengthening regulations on the energy efficiency of buildings and appliances, as well as those relating to the fuel-economy standards for new vehicles.
In contrast to the portrayal of the stated policies scenario as blindly assuming that all pledges will be met, the IEA notes that it does not give a free pass to aspirational targets. It says:
“[T]argets are not automatically assumed to be met; the prospects and timing for their realisation are subject to an assessment of relevant market, infrastructure and financial constraints…[L]ike the CPS, the STEPS does not assume that aspirational goals, such as those included in the Paris Agreement, are achieved.”
Only in the “announced pledges scenario” (APS) does the IEA assume that countries meet all of their climate pledges on time and full – regardless of how credible they are.
The APS does not appear in this year’s report, presumably because many countries missed the deadlines to publish new climate pledges ahead of COP30.
The IEA says it will publish its APS, assessing the impact of the new pledges, “once there is a more complete picture of these commitments”.
Fossil-fuel peak
In recent years, there has been a significant shift in the IEA’s outlook for fossil fuels under the stated policies scenario, which it has described as “a mirror to the plans of today’s policymakers”.
In 2020, the agency said that prevailing policy conditions pointed towards a “structural” decline in global coal demand, but that it was too soon to declare a peak in oil or gas demand.
By 2021, it said global fossil-fuel use could peak as soon as 2025, but only if all countries got on track to meet their climate goals. Under stated policies, it expected fossil-fuel use to hit a plateau from the late 2020s onwards, declining only marginally by 2050.
There was a dramatic change in 2022, when it said that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the resulting global energy crisis had “turbo-charged” the shift away from fossil fuels.
As a result, it said at the time that it expected a peak in demand for each of the fossil fuels. Coal “within a few years”, oil “in the mid-2030s” and gas ”by the end of the decade”.
This outlook sharpened further in 2023 and, by 2024, it was saying that each of the fossil fuels would see a peak in global demand before 2030.
This year’s report notes that “some formal country-level [climate] commitments have waned”, pointing to the withdrawal of the US from the Paris Agreement.
The report says the “new direction” in the US is among “major new policies” in 48 countries. The other changes it lists include Brazil’s “energy transition acceleration programme”, Japan’s new plan for 2040 and the EU’s recently adopted 2040 climate target.
Overall, the IEA data still points to peaks in demand for coal, oil and gas under the stated policies scenario, as shown in the figure below.
Alongside this there is a surge in clean technologies, with renewables overtaking oil to become the world’s largest source of energy – not just electricity – by the early 2040s.
In this year’s outlook under stated policies, the IEA sees global coal demand as already being at – or very close to – a definitive peak, as the chart above shows.
Coal then enters a structural decline, where demand for the fuel is displaced by cheaper alternatives, particularly renewable sources of electricity.
The IEA reiterates that the cost of solar, wind and batteries has respectively fallen by 90%, 70% and 90% since 2010, with further declines of 10-40% expected by 2035.
(The report notes that household energy spending would be lower under the more ambitious NZE scenario than under stated policies, despite the need for greater investment.)
However, this year’s outlook has coal use in 2030 coming in some 6% higher than expected last year, although it ultimately declines to similar levels by 2050.
For oil, the agency’s data still points to a peak in demand this decade, as electric vehicles (EVs) and more efficient combustion engines erode the need for the fuel in road transport.
While this sees oil demand in 2030 reaching similar levels to what the IEA expected last year, the post-peak decline is slightly less marked in the latest outlook, ending some 5% higher in 2050.
The biggest shift compared with last year is for gas, where the IEA suggests that global demand will keep rising until 2035, rather than peaking by 2030.
Still, the outlook has gas demand in 2030 being only 7% higher than expected last year. It notes:
“Long-term natural gas demand growth is kept lower than in recent decades by the expanding deployment of renewables, efficiency gains and electrification of end-uses.”
In terms of clean energy, the outlook sees nuclear power output growing to 39% above 2024 levels by 2035 and doubling by 2050. Solar grows nearly four-fold by 2035 and nearly nine-fold by 2050, while wind power nearly triples and quadruples over the same periods.
Notably, the IEA sees strong growth of clean-energy technologies, even in the current policies scenario. Here, renewables would still become the world’s largest energy source before 2050.
This is despite the severe headwinds assumed in this scenario, including EVs never increasing from their current low share of sales in India or the US.
The CPS would see oil and gas use continuing to rise, with demand for oil reaching 11% above current levels by 2050 and gas climbing 31%, even as renewables nearly triple.
This means that coal use would still decline, falling to a fifth below current levels by 2050.
Finally, while the IEA considers the prospect of global coal demand continuing to rise rather than falling as expected, it gives this idea short shrift. It explains:
“A growth story for coal over the coming decades cannot entirely be ruled out but it would fly in the face of two crucial structural trends witnessed in recent years: the rise of renewable sources of power generation, and the shift in China away from an especially coal-intensive model of growth and infrastructure development. As such, sustained growth for coal demand appears highly unlikely.”
The post IEA: Fossil-fuel use will peak before 2030 – unless ‘stated policies’ are abandoned appeared first on Carbon Brief.
IEA: Fossil-fuel use will peak before 2030 – unless ‘stated policies’ are abandoned
Marcelo Behar is the COP30 Special Envoy for Bioeconomy and co-founder of Ambition Loop Brazil.
Can we be the generation to end the rampant deforestation that is harming the planet’s ecosystems and climate? Back in February, the Brazilian COP30 Presidency opened a call for submissions on its proposed Roadmap for Halting Deforestation and Forest Degradation, which closes today.
What might look like a technical step quickly drew significant attention, with more than 100 responses submitted by governments, civil society organisations, businesses and other stakeholders.
This level of engagement is telling. It reflects both the urgency of the issue and the recognition that this process could shape whether the global goal to end deforestation by 2030 finally moves from ambition to delivery.
As a Brazilian, I see this moment with both pride and realism. Brazil has played a central role in elevating forests on the climate agenda, and the COP30 Presidency has shown leadership in carrying this issue forward far beyond the Belém summit.
COP30 rainforest fund unlikely to make first payments until 2028
But last year also offered a sobering signal. Despite strong efforts from the Brazilian Presidency, the proposed roadmap did not secure consensus in the final outcome of COP30. That outcome underlined a simple truth: while there is broad recognition of the importance of forests, agreeing on how to move forward remains complex. The road ahead is still long and likely uneven.
That is precisely why this moment matters.
Progress on commitments falling short
The world is not short of commitments. Over the past decade, countries have repeatedly pledged to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030. There is a growing body of experience through the REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) programme, including the emergence of jurisdictional approaches that are beginning to connect forest protection with finance at scale.
Initiatives such as the Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership have helped sustain political attention and cooperation among countries, while national strategies continue to evolve, and Indigenous Peoples and local communities remain at the forefront of protecting forests.
And yet, progress is still falling short.
The gap is not only one of alignment. It is also one of political will – and of having a credible, shared pathway that brings together these efforts in a way that drives implementation at scale.
Civil society is watching this process closely. For many organisations working across climate, nature and conservation, this is not just another initiative – it is a priority. After years of advocating to end deforestation, there is a strong sense that this moment cannot be lost. The expectation is clear: this roadmap must move beyond intention and help unlock real progress.
The opportunity now is to ensure that it does exactly that. This cannot become another report.
Implementation key to roadmap success
A detailed assessment of pathways and challenges, however valuable, will not be enough to change outcomes on the ground. What is needed is an implementation roadmap, one that connects existing commitments, aligns incentives and provides clarity on how to move from ambition to delivery between now and 2030.
The consultation process is an important step. But its value will ultimately be judged by what it produces.
If the roadmap is to succeed, several priorities should guide its development.
-
With no COP30 roadmap, hopes of saving forests hinge on voluntary initiatives
The world is falling short of a target to halt deforestation by 2030, but the “Amazon COP” failed to agree a concrete global plan to save rainforests despite backing by over 80 nations -
Deep in the Amazon, forest protection cash must vie with glitter of illegal gold
The TFFF fund launched at COP30 aims to pay communities to protect the rainforest, but will it be enough? On French Guiana’s border with Brazil, the profits to be had from mining are far higher
First: policy. It must be designed as a tool for implementation. That means going beyond diagnosis to define concrete action: who needs to act, by when, and how progress will be tracked. The solutions are not new, but coordination has been missing.
Second: accountability. It should bring coherence to the existing landscape. The value of a roadmap lies not in creating new commitments, but in connecting what already exists: global targets, REDD+ experience, national action plans, Indigenous leadership and supply chain initiatives. Reducing fragmentation is essential to accelerating delivery.
Early milestones needed
Third: finance. It must be grounded in economic reality. Halting deforestation will not happen without addressing the incentives that underpin it. Aligning public finance, private investment, and market demand with forest protection is not a technical detail; it is the core of the transition.
Fourth: transparency. Legitimacy will depend on openness. A credible roadmap cannot be developed behind closed doors. Governments, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, civil society, business and finance actors all have a role to play and must be able to see how their contributions shape the outcome.
Fifth: urgency. Progress must be visible in 2026. Without early milestones, momentum will fade. By the time climate negotiators gather in Bonn mid-year, the roadmap should have a clear structure, priority actions and growing political backing.
Governments must deliver on the plan
Finally, countries themselves will need to step forward. Last year’s outcome showed that support alone is not enough. Delivering this roadmap will require active political engagement. That means governments that are willing not only to participate in the process, but to help shape and implement it.
Brazil has created an important opening. It has also taken on the responsibility that comes with leadership: to help turn a widely supported idea into something that can deliver in practice.
The commitment to end deforestation by 2030 already exists. What is still needed is a path. And the courage to walk it.
The post How a Brazil-led roadmap can rescue global pledge to halt deforestation appeared first on Climate Home News.
How a Brazil-led roadmap can rescue global pledge to halt deforestation
A US biofuels producer that exports “green” aviation fuel to Britain and the European Union has purchased beef tallow from a Brazilian supply chain tied to illegal deforestation in the Amazon, shipping data and a court document show.
Diamond Green Diesel (DGD), a major provider of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and renewable diesel, has sourced hundreds of thousands of tonnes of beef tallow from Brazil, alongside waste fats from other sources, over the last three years, as global demand for biofuel feedstocks soars.
Reporting by Unearthed and nonprofit investigative outlet Repórter Brasil reveals DGD’s connection to a rendering plant that has sourced supplies from a meatpacker fined for buying cattle from an illegally deforested Amazon reserve. A previous investigation by Reuters and Repórter Brasil found DGD had bought animal fat from two other rendering factories linked to supplies of cattle from illegal ranches.
The newly identified factory, Pacífico Indústria e Comércio de Óleos e Proteínas Ltda, which is based in Cacoal, a small city in the far-western Amazon state of Rondônia, has been supplied by Rondônia meatpacker DistriBoi, a 2022 court document shows.
DistriBoi was fined two years ago for illegally purchasing cattle from the state’s Jaci-Paraná conservation reserve, which has been ravaged by illegal ranching.
There is no suggestion that the companies involved were aware of deforestation at farm level. But the findings suggest a traceability gap in the supply chain of feedstocks for sustainable fuels, where cattle by-products are subject to less oversight than the primary commodities of the cattle industry, such as meat and leather.
Pristine rainforest blanketed the Jaci-Paraná reserve when it was created 30 years ago to protect traditional forest activities such as rubber tapping and nut harvesting.
Today, illegal ranching has devoured nearly 80% of its forest cover and it has become a notorious example of the devastation wrought by land grabbers in the world’s largest rainforest.
“The damage to biodiversity has been devastating,” said local Indigenous activist Neidinha Suruí, who featured in the 2025 Emmy Award-winning documentary “O Território”.
“It is sad to see what has been lost,” she said.
Greener air travel?
The “renewable diesel” and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) that are being exported by DGD – a joint venture between US oil refiner Valero Energy Corp and Texas-based Darling Ingredients – are classed as “green” because they are made from feedstocks classified as waste, including tallow, which consists of fat separated from cattle carcasses.
Many governments and airlines are pinning their hopes for greener flying on SAF made with organic waste materials, including Britain which introduced a compulsory blending requirement last year.
Top green jet fuel producer linked to suspect waste-oil supply chain
Air travel accounts for about 2.5% of global carbon emissions and in contrast to other transport sectors that can be electrified, shrinking aviation’s carbon footprint is much more difficult.
Waste products such as beef tallow and used cooking oil (UCO) are considered the greenest of viable SAF feedstocks on the grounds that they do not create competition with foodstuffs such as soy oil or palm oil, nor increase deforestation pressure.
But there is concern that the global rush to ramp up SAF use could indirectly exacerbate deforestation pressure by increasing demand for feedstocks such as tallow and UCO.
That could increase the profit margins of cattle ranches – including illegal ones – and have other unintended consequences, such as encouraging fraud in supply chains, as Climate Home News has reported.
An investigation published in March by Climate Home News and Swedish broadcaster SVT found that Finnish biofuels giant Neste is sourcing key ingredients for its SAF from an opaque supply chain that enables fresh palm oil to be passed off as used, waste oil.
Because tallow is classified as waste by regulators in markets including the UK and EU, the green fuel industry’s most widely used certification scheme – International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC) – does not assess whether forests were cleared to rear the cattle that produced it in the first place.
-
Amazon fires threaten initiatives to raise cash for rainforest protection
Brazil’s Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) and other innovative finance tools will be showcased at COP30, but surging wildfires in the Amazon pose a threat to their success, climate experts warn -
Deep in the Amazon, forest protection cash must vie with glitter of illegal gold
The TFFF fund launched at COP30 aims to pay communities to protect the rainforest, but will it be enough? On French Guiana’s border with Brazil, the profits to be had from mining are far higher -
Funding gap threatens next round of IPCC climate science reports, chair warns
The latest IPCC session in Bangkok was clouded by persistent differences over when its flagship reports should be published and concern over cost-cutting proposals
This allows tallow from cattle to qualify as a sustainable feedstock for green fuels, even if they were raised on illegally deforested land.
“There is clearly an oversight within the rules if the products, in this case animal tallow, are originally coming from deforested land,” said Cian Delaney, a campaign coordinator at the clean transport and energy advocacy group Transport & Environment.
That means government SAF mandates aimed at stemming air travel emissions could help boost the earnings of cattle ranchers linked to illegal deforestation in Brazil, where ranching and other forms of agriculture have been the main driver of forest loss.
Land grabbers clear way for ranchers
Once covered by an unbroken rainforest canopy, Rondônia’s Jaci-Paraná reserve has been decimated by illegal deforestation driven by cattle ranching – a major cause of tree loss in the Amazon.
Land-grabbers have seized – often violently – and cleared more than three-quarters of its forest for pasture, as ranching has steadily advanced into the southern Amazon.
Suruí, the local Indigenous activist, said companies that buy products derived from illegal activities perpetuate environmental crimes in the rainforest.
“If there were no meat processors buying illegally sourced cattle, there would be no land grabbing and no deforestation,” Suruí told Repórter Brasil, which partnered on the new investigation with Unearthed, and a team of journalists supported by JournalismFund Europe.
Lawsuits and linked supply chains
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has pledged to end all deforestation in the country by 2030, in part by strengthening environmental enforcement in the world’s biggest rainforest.
In Rondônia, authorities have launched more than 50 lawsuits related to land-grabbing and deforestation in the Jaci-Paraná reserve alone. Local slaughterhouse DistriBoi is named in 31 of the lawsuits, including the 2024 case in which it was fined.
According to the 2022 court document, which concerned an unrelated labour dispute, lawyers for Pacífico refer to DistriBoi as the rendering plant’s “largest supplier of raw materials”.
US-based DGD received almost 15,000 tonnes of tallow from Pacífico from 2023 to 2025 at its Texas refinery, as well as used cooking oil from various countries and sources, according to trade database Panjiva.
Darling Ingredients is also a parent company of Pacífico since its 2022 acquisition of Brazilian rendering company FASA Group.
A spokesperson for Darling Ingredients denied that Pacífico had sourced beef residues from DistriBoi’s Ji-Paraná slaughterhouse – one of two that the meatpacker operates in Rondônia.
“The rendering plant Pacífico does not source any materials from the slaughterhouse Distriboi in Ji-Paraná,” the spokesperson said in an emailed response, without providing evidence or commenting directly on the content of the 2022 court document.
Darling did not respond to a follow-up question about Distriboi’s other slaughterhouse in the region, which, according to cattle transfer documents, has also bought from a farm that has illegally cleared forest within the extractive reserve.
“Our relationships are typically with the slaughterhouse, several levels removed from cattle ranchers. Regardless, we are committed to ensuring our raw materials are deforestation free. We expect our raw material suppliers to abide by our supplier code of conduct. In addition, we are in the process of requiring all [the] raw materials to attest that their material is deforestation free,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
DistriBoi said in an apparent reference to the pending Jaci-Paraná lawsuits that “the matters mentioned … are already under review, including by higher courts”. It has previously denied wrongdoing. The company’s statement did not address a question about its commercial ties to Pacífico.
Valero Energy, the major refiner that co-owns DGD with Darling Ingredients, did not respond to requests for comment, nor did DGD itself.
From slaughterhouse to SAF
In an effort to rein in carbon emissions from air travel, regulators in Britain and the EU have mandated progressively increasing SAF blending quotas in the years ahead, creating a new market for feedstocks including beef tallow.
Brazil’s exports of tallow to the US have risen sharply in recent years, up from less than 10,000 tonnes in 2021 to almost 400,000 tonnes last year, according to Panjiva, reflecting growing demand for biofuels like SAF.
In the UK, Europe’s biggest aviation market by seat capacity, jet fuel was required to contain 2% SAF by the end of 2025, rising to 10% by 2030 and 22% by 2040.
DGD shipped 134,000 tonnes of SAF worth nearly $90 million from Texas to the UK in 2025, according to trade data from Panjiva. The company also exported smaller amounts of renewable diesel to Britain.
The EU received biofuels, including small quantities of SAF, worth over $1.1 billion from DGD’s Texas refinery last year, figures show.
Is the world’s big idea for greener air travel a flight of fancy?
Unearthed’s investigation could not identify which airlines or airports buy DGD’s SAF once it arrives in Britain.
Valero, DGD’s other parent company, is positioning itself as a key player in the transition to lower-carbon fuels in the UK, where it markets its renewable diesel under the Texaco brand.
It has been an active participant in SAF policy discussions and has criticised the government’s planned cap on waste fat sources in SAF, calling them “the world’s most cost-effective production route for SAF” in a submission to parliament.
Helping to cut emissions?
Even tighter oversight over SAF feedstocks is crucial to ensure that blending mandates such as Britain’s are effectively lowering emissions, said Anna Krajinska, a director at Transport & Environment UK.
Forests store vast amounts of carbon; when they are cut down or burned this carbon is released into the atmosphere.
“If there’s tallow coming from land that’s been deforested, then those emissions might be so high that you might not be getting to the greenhouse gas reduction threshold,” Krajinska said.
But as the world’s appetite for flying keeps on growing, some experts say SAF is the only viable means to reduce aviation emissions at present.
Referring to the deforestation links identified in Unearthed’s investigation, Wouter Dewulf, an aviation economist at Belgium’s University of Antwerp, said it “would be important to assess how large this infraction is”.
“I’m quite sure you have aberrations,” Dewulf added. “But biofuels are the best alternative for the moment.”
T&E’s Delaney said there needs to be less opacity and better oversight from regulatory authorities. “Right now, there are just too many blindspots,” he added.
The post UK imports of “green” jet fuel linked to Amazon deforestation appeared first on Climate Home News.
UK imports of “green” jet fuel linked to Amazon deforestation
A company has proposed to build a crude oil pipeline crossing the Canadian border near where the long-contested project would have entered the United States.
No project better embodies the nation’s wild swings in climate and energy policy than the Keystone XL pipeline.
-
Climate Change8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits