Addressing climate change: Why Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, and National Iranian Oil must curb emissions alongside global reforestation efforts to save our planet?
Rayhan Rafi:
In the fight against climate change, reforestation has emerged as a widely endorsed solution. The idea is simple and appealing: plant trees, and they will absorb the excess carbon dioxide that is heating our planet. From governments to oil companies, pledges to plant billions, even trillions, of trees have proliferated. Yet, while trees play a vital role in carbon sequestration, the narrative that reforestation alone can mitigate climate change is overly simplistic and dangerously misleading. However, this well-intentioned narrative oversimplifies a complex issue, especially when juxtaposed against the relentless carbon emissions of major fossil fuel producers like Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, the National Iranian Oil Company and many more on the culprits list.
The dark reality of reforestation
Planting trees is often portrayed as an unequivocal good, a straightforward remedy to our carbon woes. However, this perspective fails to consider the complex dynamics of ecosystems and climate systems. Trees are darker than many natural surfaces such as grasslands or snowfields. Dark surfaces absorb more heat, potentially warming local climates rather than cooling them. A study published in the journal Science revealed that the cooling effects of new forests absorbing carbon dioxide could be significantly offset by changes in atmospheric chemistry and albedo—the amount of sunlight reflected back into space.
Dr. James Weber from the University of Sheffield, who led the study, cautioned, “We’re not saying trees are bad. We’re saying trees have a part to play, but we need to think about how they affect the whole Earth system.” This nuanced understanding is crucial as we design and implement reforestation and afforestation projects.
Poorly planned tree planting can lead to increased carbon emissions and damaged ecosystems. For instance, planting non-native species can disrupt local biodiversity, while converting natural grasslands or wetlands into forests can release stored carbon. The method, location, and type of trees planted matter as much as the number of trees.
The major emitters: Fossil fuel giants
While trees are part of the solution, the crux of the climate crisis lies in our continued reliance on fossil fuels. According to the Carbon Majors Report, state-owned companies are responsible for a staggering 33% of global carbon emissions. Leading the pack are Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, and the National Iranian Oil Company. Despite public relations campaigns that emphasize their commitment to sustainability, these companies continue to expand fossil fuel extraction, significantly increasing their emissions post-Paris Agreement.
From 2016 to 2022, 80% of global emissions were traced back to just 57 corporate and state-producing entities. This concentration highlights the disproportionate impact a small number of companies have on the planet’s climate. Saudi Aramco alone is responsible for approximately 5% of global CO2 emissions since 1965, making it one of the largest contributors to global warming.
China and Russia have also played significant roles. Chinese coal production saw a 4.4% increase in emissions from 2016 to 2022 compared to the previous seven years, while Russian production increased by 31%. This rise is indicative of a broader trend where state-owned and investor-owned companies continue to boost production, prioritizing economic growth over environmental stewardship.
Global emission patterns and responsibilities
A regional breakdown of emissions reveals stark differences in corporate and state behavior. Asian and Middle Eastern companies have seen the most significant increases in emissions since the Paris Agreement. In Asia, 87% of assessed companies reported higher emissions post-2016, driven by economic expansion and increased coal use. Similarly, in the Middle East, 70% of companies saw rising emissions, highlighting the region’s dependency on oil and gas.
In contrast, North America showed a more encouraging trend. A majority of companies in this region reported decreased emissions, indicating a shift towards cleaner energy sources and more stringent environmental regulations. However, this positive change is not enough to counterbalance the global rise in emissions.
The European Union and African countries also displayed mixed results, with several companies increasing emissions despite regional commitments to reduce carbon footprints. Australia and South America showed some reductions, driven by significant decreases from companies like BHP and Petroleos de Venezuela.
The paradox of tree planting and emission reduction
Despite the stark realities of fossil fuel emissions, initiatives like tree planting continue to receive substantial attention and investment. Saudi Aramco, for example, launched an initiative to plant one million trees across the Kingdom by 2025. While commendable, such efforts are overshadowed by the company’s vast carbon footprint.
India’s record-breaking plantation of 49.3 million tree saplings in a single day in 2016 demonstrates the scale and ambition of global tree planting efforts. Russia claims a reforestation potential of over 151 million hectares, followed by the United States with 103 million hectares. These figures, though impressive, are often criticized for being overhyped and unreliable.
The underlying problem remains that our society continues to release greenhouse gases at unprecedented rates. Melting ice sheets, rising sea levels, and extreme weather events are all symptoms of this deeper issue. While reforestation is a necessary part of the solution, it cannot reverse climate change on its own.
A call to action: Beyond planting trees
To genuinely combat climate change, we need a multi-faceted approach that includes but is not limited to reforestation. Governments and corporations must prioritize reducing emissions at the source. This involves transitioning to renewable energy, implementing stricter emissions regulations, and investing in sustainable technologies.
International cooperation is essential. Developed countries, which have historically contributed the most to greenhouse gas emissions, must lead by example. This means not only reducing their emissions but also supporting developing nations in their green transitions.
Furthermore, transparency and accountability are critical. State-owned companies, which tend to be more oppositional to climate regulations, must be held to the same standards as private enterprises. Engaging these entities in meaningful climate policies is crucial for global progress.
Pathways to a sustainable future
The narrative that planting trees will save us from the worst effects of climate change is comforting but incomplete. While trees play a critical role in absorbing carbon dioxide, they cannot compensate for the continuous and increasing emissions from fossil fuel giants. Addressing climate change requires a holistic approach that includes reducing fossil fuel use, implementing sustainable practices, and indeed, planting trees where appropriate.
As we move forward, we must balance our enthusiasm for tree planting with a realistic understanding of its limitations and the urgent need to tackle the root cause of climate change—our dependency on fossil fuels. Only then can we hope to create a sustainable future for our planet.
