Arctic Petroleum and the 2°C Goal: A Case for Accountability for Fossil-Fuel Supply

Daria Shapovalova

doi:10.1163/18786561-10030003

Arctic Petroleum and the 2°C Goal: A Case for Accountability for Fossil-Fuel Supply

Daria Shapovalova

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

13 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The Arctic is both a place disproportionately affected by climate change and a place that has been, and continues to be, subject to large-scale oil-and-gas development. Production and subsequent combustion of these resources would compromise the treaty-established target of keeping global warming ‘well below’ 2°C. The global regulatory efforts on climate change are centred on greenhouse gas emissions from fossil-fuel consumption, almost ignoring the supply side. In the absence of universal and strict emission-reduction targets, petroleum exports and carbon leakage jeopardize the effectiveness of the climate change regime. Through the examination of treaties and national practice, this paper argues for the establishment of accountability for the production of Arctic petroleum in light of climate change.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	282-307
Number of pages	26
Journal	Climate Law
Volume	10
Issue number	3-4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1163/18786561-10030003
Publication status	Published - 18 Nov 2020

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
There is growing support for supply-side measures in general. Over 500 environmental ngo s from 76 countries signed the 2017 Lofoten Declaration calling for ‘the wealthy fossil fuel producers to lead in putting an end to fossil fuel development and to manage the decline of existing production.’ This position is supported by some politicians and industry representatives. In the last two years of the Obama Administration, for example, much attention was focused on climate change. In discussing the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline project, the US president said: ‘if we’re going to prevent large parts of this Earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky.’ A 2016 report by the French energy company Total stressed that ‘the 2°C scenario highlights that a part of the world’s fossil fuel resources cannot be developed.’ The World Bank is no longer financing oil-and-gas projects, on climate change grounds. For the Arctic context specifically, Sjåfjell and Halvorssen examined the climatic implications of new oil development in Norway, arguing that investing in oil-and-gas operations and carbon-intensive infrastructure over the next thirty years in the Arctic ‘is clearly against the object and purpose of the unfccc and the Paris Agreement, when the international community should be phasing out fossil fuel use and moving toward renewable energy across the globe.’

Publisher Copyright:
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020.

Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

Keywords

Russia
Arctic
governance
north
sanctions
oil and gas
fossil fuels
supply side
Arctic Ocean
Arctic petroleum production
Arctic governance
international environmental law
Greenpeace v. Norway case
Environmental impact assessment
International environmental law
Greenpeace v. Norway case (People v. Arctic Oil case, Norwegian Court of Appeal, 2020)
Fossil fuels
Supply side

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1163/18786561-10030003Licence: CC BY

Shapovalova_et_al_CL_ArcticPetroleumAnd_VoR
© Daria Shapovalova, 2020 | doi:10.1163/18786561-10030003 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the cc by 4.0 license.Climate Law 10 (2020) 282-307 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Final published version, 303 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{98bda0cf12164fadbc6bbaa146de9c1b,

title = "Arctic Petroleum and the 2°C Goal: A Case for Accountability for Fossil-Fuel Supply",

abstract = "The Arctic is both a place disproportionately affected by climate change and a place that has been, and continues to be, subject to large-scale oil-and-gas development. Production and subsequent combustion of these resources would compromise the treaty-established target of keeping global warming {\textquoteleft}well below{\textquoteright} 2°C. The global regulatory efforts on climate change are centred on greenhouse gas emissions from fossil-fuel consumption, almost ignoring the supply side. In the absence of universal and strict emission-reduction targets, petroleum exports and carbon leakage jeopardize the effectiveness of the climate change regime. Through the examination of treaties and national practice, this paper argues for the establishment of accountability for the production of Arctic petroleum in light of climate change.",

keywords = "Russia, Arctic, governance, north, sanctions, oil and gas, fossil fuels, supply side, Arctic Ocean, Arctic petroleum production, Arctic governance, international environmental law, Greenpeace v. Norway case, Environmental impact assessment, International environmental law, Greenpeace v. Norway case (People v. Arctic Oil case, Norwegian Court of Appeal, 2020), Fossil fuels, Supply side",

author = "Daria Shapovalova",

note = "Funding Information: There is growing support for supply-side measures in general. Over 500 environmental ngo s from 76 countries signed the 2017 Lofoten Declaration calling for {\textquoteleft}the wealthy fossil fuel producers to lead in putting an end to fossil fuel development and to manage the decline of existing production.{\textquoteright} This position is supported by some politicians and industry representatives. In the last two years of the Obama Administration, for example, much attention was focused on climate change. In discussing the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline project, the US president said: {\textquoteleft}if we{\textquoteright}re going to prevent large parts of this Earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we{\textquoteright}re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky.{\textquoteright} A 2016 report by the French energy company Total stressed that {\textquoteleft}the 2°C scenario highlights that a part of the world{\textquoteright}s fossil fuel resources cannot be developed.{\textquoteright} The World Bank is no longer financing oil-and-gas projects, on climate change grounds. For the Arctic context specifically, Sj{\aa}fjell and Halvorssen examined the climatic implications of new oil development in Norway, arguing that investing in oil-and-gas operations and carbon-intensive infrastructure over the next thirty years in the Arctic {\textquoteleft}is clearly against the object and purpose of the unfccc and the Paris Agreement, when the international community should be phasing out fossil fuel use and moving toward renewable energy across the globe.{\textquoteright} Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",

year = "2020",

month = nov,

day = "18",

doi = "10.1163/18786561-10030003",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

pages = "282--307",

journal = "Climate Law",

issn = "1878-6553",

publisher = "IOS Press",

number = "3-4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Arctic Petroleum and the 2°C Goal

T2 - A Case for Accountability for Fossil-Fuel Supply

AU - Shapovalova, Daria

N1 - Funding Information: There is growing support for supply-side measures in general. Over 500 environmental ngo s from 76 countries signed the 2017 Lofoten Declaration calling for ‘the wealthy fossil fuel producers to lead in putting an end to fossil fuel development and to manage the decline of existing production.’ This position is supported by some politicians and industry representatives. In the last two years of the Obama Administration, for example, much attention was focused on climate change. In discussing the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline project, the US president said: ‘if we’re going to prevent large parts of this Earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky.’ A 2016 report by the French energy company Total stressed that ‘the 2°C scenario highlights that a part of the world’s fossil fuel resources cannot be developed.’ The World Bank is no longer financing oil-and-gas projects, on climate change grounds. For the Arctic context specifically, Sjåfjell and Halvorssen examined the climatic implications of new oil development in Norway, arguing that investing in oil-and-gas operations and carbon-intensive infrastructure over the next thirty years in the Arctic ‘is clearly against the object and purpose of the unfccc and the Paris Agreement, when the international community should be phasing out fossil fuel use and moving toward renewable energy across the globe.’ Publisher Copyright: © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2020/11/18

Y1 - 2020/11/18

N2 - The Arctic is both a place disproportionately affected by climate change and a place that has been, and continues to be, subject to large-scale oil-and-gas development. Production and subsequent combustion of these resources would compromise the treaty-established target of keeping global warming ‘well below’ 2°C. The global regulatory efforts on climate change are centred on greenhouse gas emissions from fossil-fuel consumption, almost ignoring the supply side. In the absence of universal and strict emission-reduction targets, petroleum exports and carbon leakage jeopardize the effectiveness of the climate change regime. Through the examination of treaties and national practice, this paper argues for the establishment of accountability for the production of Arctic petroleum in light of climate change.

AB - The Arctic is both a place disproportionately affected by climate change and a place that has been, and continues to be, subject to large-scale oil-and-gas development. Production and subsequent combustion of these resources would compromise the treaty-established target of keeping global warming ‘well below’ 2°C. The global regulatory efforts on climate change are centred on greenhouse gas emissions from fossil-fuel consumption, almost ignoring the supply side. In the absence of universal and strict emission-reduction targets, petroleum exports and carbon leakage jeopardize the effectiveness of the climate change regime. Through the examination of treaties and national practice, this paper argues for the establishment of accountability for the production of Arctic petroleum in light of climate change.

KW - Russia

KW - Arctic

KW - governance

KW - north

KW - sanctions

KW - oil and gas

KW - fossil fuels

KW - supply side

KW - Arctic Ocean

KW - Arctic petroleum production

KW - Arctic governance

KW - international environmental law

KW - Greenpeace v. Norway case

KW - Environmental impact assessment

KW - International environmental law

KW - Greenpeace v. Norway case (People v. Arctic Oil case, Norwegian Court of Appeal, 2020)

KW - Fossil fuels

KW - Supply side

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097305263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1163/18786561-10030003

DO - 10.1163/18786561-10030003

M3 - Article

SN - 1878-6553

VL - 10

SP - 282

EP - 307

JO - Climate Law

JF - Climate Law

IS - 3-4

ER -

Arctic Petroleum and the 2°C Goal: A Case for Accountability for Fossil-Fuel Supply

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Daria Shapovalova

Climate Case for Leaving Arctic Petroleum in the Ground’

Climate and Energy: Shaping the Pathway to Low-Carbon Energy Future through International Law

Cite this

Arctic Petroleum and the 2°C Goal: A Case for Accountability for Fossil-Fuel Supply

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Profiles

Daria Shapovalova

Activities

Climate Case for Leaving Arctic Petroleum in the Ground’

Climate and Energy: Shaping the Pathway to Low-Carbon Energy Future through International Law

Cite this