G7: Leaders rehabilitate gas, climate defenders protest
The G7 reiterated support for gas investment in its press release published on Saturday 20 May, qualifying it as a “temporary” measure to reduce dependence on Russian energy. The decision has been harshly panned by climate advocates, who believe it risks undermining climate objectives.
Despite disagreements between Japan and European countries, an April meeting of G7 climate ministers agreed that gas investment would be “appropriate to help address potential shortfalls” following the war invasion in Ukraine and disruption of energy markets. Could
read this alsoEnergy Council: what is the “gas package” adopted by European ministers?
Saturday’s announcement by G7 leaders at their summit in Hiroshima, Japan, used an alternative formula – ultimately proposed by Germany, sources say – to reincorporate gas investment considering that “Russian Energy The gradual end of the use of Russian gas will also be based on “energy savings and gas demand reduction” in accordance with the Paris climate objectives and the acceleration of the development of renewable energy, The document specifies, the qualification of clean energy means energy security.
Without specifying the meaning of the word “sustainable”, the document states that these investments must be consistent with climate objectives and integrated into the development of renewable and low-carbon hydrogen. The G7 has pledged to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 and limit global warming to 1.5°C. “We are sticking to our targets for 2030 and 2045. So if we burn more coal or gas today, we will have to produce less CO2 in the coming years,” said a German government representative.
War in Ukraine, “an excuse”
“Given the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels, what the leaders have brought to the table represents an endorsement of new fossil fuels,” Tracy Carty, global climate policy specialist at Greenpeace International, said in a statement. German government officials rejected that criticism, saying the investment was needed to move away from Russian gas and find an alternative.
Max Lawson, a member of the campaign group Oxfam, said the G7 had maintained a loophole for new fossil gas investment by using Russia’s military conflict with Ukraine “as an excuse”. “They try to pin the blame on others, when they themselves are away from contributing their fair share,” he said in a statement.