For the good of the whole planet, stop fossil fuel production in the Arctic

Oil and gas production in the Arctic is expected to peak by 2040—fully 10 years after world production has peaked. By 2050, the gap between Arctic fossil fuel production and the pathway to hold global warming to 1.5°C could reach 700 per cent, mostly because of Russia’s plans to develop new oil fields in the Arctic.

As noted in our recently published research brief, “Missing the Target” the Arctic is the obvious place to start if we are serious about limiting warming.

This year’s Emissions Gap Report from the United Nations Environment Programme, aptly titled Broken Record, finds that the world will miss the Paris goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C by a country mile. 

Significantly ramping up climate action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 is the only way to dodge the most severe consequences of runaway climate change. Yet as it stands, governments around the globe currently plan to produce twice as much fossil fuel by 2030 than is compatible with the Paris goal. According to the 2023 Production Gap Report, compared to 2020 levels, annual oil and gas production, respectively, are projected to increase by 27 and 25 per cent by 2030 and by 29 and 41 per cent by 2050.

For the Arctic, there is irony in the fact that while no region on Earth has been hit harder by the climate crisis—or stands to suffer more—the region is among those where oil and gas producers are actively pursuing new projects. The US, Norway and Russia plan to expand hydrocarbon projects there. 

Russia is by far the biggest oil and gas producer in the Arctic, producing over 91 per cent of all Arctic-sourced oil and gas in 2022. Overall, 80 per cent of the gas and 60 per cent of the oil produced in Russia are extracted in the Arctic region. Russia’s production at current levels is misaligned with the Paris goal: by 2050, the expected volumes from reserves that are already developed and produced will exceed the Paris-aligned targets by 200 to 300 per cent. To meet the Paris goals, Russia needs to prematurely shut down half of its currently producing oil and gas fields in the region.

In Alaska, the greatest source of future emissions will come from developing fossil fuel reserves that are past the commercial discovery stage but still awaiting investment decisions. In Norway, the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate believes the future of Norwegian petroleum activity is in the Barents Sea, which it claims holds “more than half of the oil and gas that has not yet been discovered.” 

In all places, fossil fuel resources that are still in the exploration and appraisal stages must stay in the ground if we are to even come close to respecting the Paris target.

As the Production Gap Report notes, the current mismatch between climate ambitions and plans for future fossil fuel production sends mixed signals about countries’ priorities. The construction of new fossil fuel infrastructure will only make the much-needed transition to renewable energy more costly and difficult.

It’s time to shine a light on a critical loophole: exports of oil and gas don’t count when countries report emission levels—so nations like the US and Norway can report reductions while actually increasing the quantities they produce. Essentially, they are exporting their emissions.

Let’s leave the Arctic’s mineral riches in the ground—where they belong.

– Elena F. Tracy, sustainable development lead, WWF Global Arctic Programme

There are so many good reasons for winding down fossil fuel operations in the Arctic that it’s hard to know where to begin: hazardous environmental conditions, fragile ecosystems, higher production costs, stranded assets. Investing here makes no sense when you consider that global demand for fossil fuels is expected to plummet by 2030 as renewable energy sources ramp up. 

The upshot is that ecosystems, species, biodiversity, local communities and the planet at large risk significant, irreparable losses and long-term hardships from Arctic oil extraction while a handful of producers from wealthy nations stand to gain short-term financial wealth. And once demand collapses, we will be left with a minefield of stranded assets across the previously pristine North.

Governments influence oil and gas expansion: they issue licences, grant permits, approve and fund infrastructure, and introduce favourable tax regimes, creating the conditions that attract investments to the sector.

What needs to happen should be obvious. Arctic countries must stop regarding the region as the next frontier for fossil fuel expansion, and investors must stop giving producers the means to continue. We call upon Arctic governments to cease issuing new licences and permits for oil and gas exploration—and on investors, including financial institutions, to stop backing these plans. 

Let’s leave the Arctic’s mineral riches in the ground—where they belong.