Current commitments by oil major players appear insufficient to avert climate catastrophe. Decarbonisation scenarios published by BP, Shell, and Equinor during 2020–2021 fall short of limiting warming to safe levels. In short, the plans do not reach the ambition required to keep global warming within the Paris Agreement target of 1.5 degrees Celsius.
A recent study reported by Nature Communications under the leadership of Climate Analytics finds that the 2050 decarbonisation pathways proposed by these firms fail to meet the core objective of the Paris accord: restricting temperature rise. The study contrasts corporate pathways with scientific benchmarks to reveal the gap between industry plans and climate science. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
To craft these scenarios, researchers estimate future energy needs across sectors and identify the energy resources required to meet them. They project energy mixes—including fossil fuels, nuclear power, and renewables—to approximate resulting carbon emissions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has long simulated how greenhouse gas concentrations would shape climate outcomes toward the end of the century, helping scientists forecast potential warming trajectories. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
Polluting emissions persist, a reality echoed by visual media that accompany discussions of energy futures. The commentary and images underscore the ongoing tension between fossil fuel use and climate protection goals. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
In an effort to demonstrate commitment to climate action, oil companies have produced their own decarbonisation scenarios. Yet for decades these projections could not be consistently compared with IPCC expectations, complicating assessments of whether they align with the Paris Agreement. The result is a disconnect between corporate narratives and independent scientific guidance. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
All scenarios are insufficient
Researchers have attempted to synthesize corporate plans with the International Energy Agency’s projections into three potential pathways, often reflecting varying degrees of ambition for energy transition. Analyses of these pathways suggest that the collective effort to reduce fossil fuel dependence would not curb warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius with confidence. In fact, studies indicate a higher likelihood of exceeding that threshold under many published scenarios, a finding highlighted by Climate Analytics researchers and climate scientists involved in the project. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
Under a moderate commitment scenario aligned with Equinor, projections show a peak warming of about 1.73 degrees Celsius around 2060 relative to pre-industrial levels. A scenario modeled for BP likewise struggles to meet the aggressive targets, with expected emissions reductions not sufficient to prevent significant warming by mid-century. Shell’s Sky scenario, aiming for net zero by 2070, projects a warming path that rises beyond 1.8 degrees Celsius through the late 2060s. Even the IEA’s current development outlook suggests that warming would remain above 1.7 degrees Celsius, with the peak occurring in the mid-2050s for developed economies and later for other regions, underscoring the gap between current plans and climate goals. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
Even BP’s and others’ most aspirational pathways, such as NetZero by 2050, show an average maximum warming around 1.65 degrees Celsius, a figure still above what the Paris Agreement requires. The central takeaway from the study is clear: every fraction of a degree matters, and current trajectories are not aligned with the Paris targets for limiting warming. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
Don’t let oil companies rely on inadequate targets. The research team emphasizes that exceeding even short-lived 1.5 degrees of warming would carry serious, long-lasting consequences and would hamper society’s ability to adapt to climate change. As climate policy experts note, it is vital to scrutinize goals for real ambition rather than accepting softened targets. Skeptical scrutiny helps policymakers assess how the energy system can transform in practice, enabling corrective action if targets fail to curb warming sufficiently. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
Experts involved in the study urge governments to use these findings to evaluate energy-system transitions robustly and to guide policy toward pathways that truly align with climate science, even when that requires tougher choices. The collaboration across researchers across institutions demonstrates how independent analysis can illuminate gaps between industry commitments and scientific imperatives, driving more rigorous climate action. Recommendations from the study stress the importance of transparent, apples-to-apples comparisons between corporate scenarios and IPCC science to prevent misalignment with Paris goals. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
In summary, the evidence indicates that existing corporate decarbonisation plans do not guarantee staying within 1.5 degrees of warming, and more decisive measures are needed from both industry and governments to safeguard the climate future. The debate continues as policymakers weigh stronger benchmarks, faster deployment of clean energy, and stricter reporting standards to close the gap between ambition and outcome. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]
References and data are drawn from peer-reviewed analyses by Climate Analytics and collaborators, including Nature Communications. The study highlights the critical role of independent assessment in shaping climate policy and the energy transition. [Cited: Climate Analytics; Nature Communications]