iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

The lesson for fossil fuel phase-outs is that uneven costs don't automatically divide industry. Firms also weigh peer relationships, external pressure and the risk that supporting regulation today invites more tomorrow.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

These forces don't always hold. Under Trump 1, better technology and investor and NGO pressure led some firms to break ranks and back methane rules. When Biden's IRA brought in a methane fee, a few influential firms facing low costs quietly accepted it.

muse.jhu.edu

Project MUSE -- Verification required!

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Firms also fear precedent, what Drahos calls "precipitation risk": support regulation today and it may drive further regulation tomorrow. As one executive put it: "It is a slippery slope. If we give an inch, gosh knows where it will stop."

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Part of the answer is coalition politics: cambridge.org/core/journal... Breaking ranks risks losing respect and influence among peers, & it weakens a coalition firms rely on across many issues. "Industry can't advocate effectively…if industry is always being divided and conquered."

cambridge.org

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

When the Obama administration moved to regulate methane, the industry united against federal rules. A handful of companies leading on methane privately favoured regulation, but none backed it publicly.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Methane regulation is a good example. Cutting methane is one of the fastest ways to curb near-term warming, and the IEA says oil and gas methane must fall 84% between 2020 and 2035 for 1.5°C. Around 40% of those cuts can be made at no net cost to operators.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Not all supply-side policies threaten the industry's existence. "Softer" measures like upstream taxes, emissions intensity standards and stricter licensing raise costs or set conditions but allow production to continue. Because they hit producers unevenly, they could divide them

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

New on the SUS-POL blog 💡 You might expect supply-side climate policies that favour some fossil fuel producers over others to split the industry. But research by @nikolaidrahos.bsky.social on US methane regulation finds firms often stick together. Why? 🧵

111

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 15/06/2026

As governments debate fossil fuel phase-out and energy security, this research argues that exploration itself (not just production and consumption) should be treated as a core policy issue.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 15/06/2026

The research also addresses political feasibility. While a universal agreement may be difficult, partial bans led by OECD and BRICS countries could still deliver substantial climate benefits while protecting lower-income countries.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 15/06/2026

One of the paper's most striking findings: Oil exploration only becomes socially beneficial when carbon prices exceed $144/tCO₂ - far above current carbon prices in most countries.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 15/06/2026

Their analysis models around 14,000 oil fields worldwide and finds that a global ban on new oil exploration could: ➡️ Avoid 114 GtCO₂e of emissions ➡️ Generate $12.5 trillion in global welfare gains ➡️ Reduce the risks of oversupply & stranded assets.

100

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 15/06/2026

Can banning new oil exploration help solve one of climate policy's biggest dilemmas? A new blog by Renaud Coulomb, France d'Agrain and Fanny Henriet argues the answer is yes 🧵 www.sussex.ac.uk/research/pro...

sussex.ac.uk

The Case for Banning Oil Exploration

Renaud Coulomb, France d’Agrain, & Fanny Henriet argue that a universal ban on oil exploration could generate $12.5 trillion in global welfare gains.

121

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

Read the full open-access paper here: www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....

tandfonline.com

000

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

What holds them together is coalitions. And coalitions can break. If we're serious about keeping fossil fuels in the ground, the work isn't just passing the policy - it's building the politics that let it survive the next election and the next crisis.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

But the biggest takeaway from our paper is that none of these policies are safe. They aren't technical fixes, but political settlements, constantly re-fought and contested. Costa Rica's ban is under pressure and the UK's commitment wobbles every time energy prices spike.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

3️⃣ Prestige & legitimacy. Leading at COP, hosting the summit, not wanting to be caught backsliding and labelled a hypocrite.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

2️⃣ Crisis as a window. Oil shocks, the war in Ukraine, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, "climate elections." Disruption cracks open settlements that looked permanent.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

Three things drive these policies: 1️⃣ Economics. Mature, high-cost basins (the North Sea) or a tourism-and-biodiversity economy worth protecting (Costa Rica). When the economics of extraction sour, the politics of phase-out get somewhat easier.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

The study draws on 100+ interviews across four first-movers (Costa Rica, Colombia, Denmark and the UK) with the officials who designed the bans, the politicians fighting them, and industry, unions & campaigners.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

There are now 1,820+ supply-side climate policies worldwide, measures that restrict fossil fuel production itself. A new open-access paper in from the @suspol.bsky.social team in @ripejournal.bsky.social asks a simple question: why and how do states actually do this?

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

Why would a country leave billions of dollars of oil & gas in the ground? On a narrow economic view it looks irrational: walking away from profit, jobs and geopolitical leverage, and picking a fight with one of the most powerful industries on earth. And yet it's happening🧵

154

Reposted by SUS-POL

Lukas Slothuus @lslothuus.bsky.social · 08/04/2026

🇨🇴Ahead of Colombia hosting the world’s first international conference for the transition away from fossil fuels in a few weeks, all levers need to be pulled, all opportunities explored. @suspol.bsky.social @sussex.ac.uk @peternewell.bsky.social Read and share: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

sciencedirect.com

Symbolic wins as stepping stones toward material gains: Lessons from Sweden’s fossil fuel production ban

How and why do some countries without ongoing fossil fuel exploration and extraction decide to unilaterally ban such activities? As part of a global m…

132

Reposted by SUS-POL

Lukas Slothuus @lslothuus.bsky.social · 08/04/2026

NEW ARTICLE: How can fossil fuel non-producer contribute to the transition away from fossil fuels? 🇸🇪🛑Drawing on extensive interview data from my fieldwork in Sweden, I trace the political dynamics of Sweden’s 2022 fossil fuel exploration and extraction ban: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

sciencedirect.com

Symbolic wins as stepping stones toward material gains: Lessons from Sweden’s fossil fuel production ban

How and why do some countries without ongoing fossil fuel exploration and extraction decide to unilaterally ban such activities? As part of a global m…

3147

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 04/02/2026

Climate policy is often framed as incentives or bans. But evidence from Switzerland’s heating sector points to a smarter middle path: quasi-bans. New piece from @paoyanguas.bsky.social & @jmarkard.bsky.social sets out what can be gained from this approach👇 www.sussex.ac.uk/research/pro...

sussex.ac.uk

Quasi-Bans: enhancing political feasibility while advancing phase-outs

Swiss heating shows quasi-bans speed phase-outs and boost feasibility by nudging the middle and pairing subsidies with alternatives.

022

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

With countries like the Netherlands and Australia already taking steps, 2026 is a key moment to push ISDS off the table 👩‍⚖️

130

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

Climate clubs like BOGA and COFFIS - and possibly a new coalition - could reform treaties, carve out fossil fuels, or remove ISDS entirely 💪

130

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

ISDS has enabled fossil fuel firms to extract $80B+ in public funds and sue governments for rejecting new coal, oil, and gas projects🛑

121

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

Colombia’s environment minister named ISDS as “one of the greatest obstacles” to the energy transition ❌

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

Colombia🇨🇴 + the Netherlands🇳🇱are now moving ahead with a world-first fossil fuel phase-out conference in 2026

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

At #COP30, 80+ countries backed a fossil fuel phase-out roadmap but it was blocked by petrostates. The final text didn’t even mention fossil fuels 🤔

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 01/12/2025

📢 A just transition means phasing out fossil fuels and the ISDS system that protects them 📢 A new contribution from @kylat.bsky.social sets out why reform to the investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) system is essential for phase-outs. sussex.ac.uk/research/pro... Quick 🧵👇

sussex.ac.uk

A just transition requires roadmaps to phase-out fossil fuels and ISDS

At COP30, calls to phase-out fossil fuels were blocked, but Colombia pushed on -also warning that ISDS remains a major barrier to the transition.

154

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

What does this mean for the road ahead? 💪Pressure, policy, and new forms of cooperation. Check out the full briefing here: sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gate...

sussex.ac.uk

031

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

🏛️COP30 improved parts of the climate governance scaffolding. But it failed to deliver decisive action on fossil fuel phase-outs - the core task that will determine whether the world avoids climate chaos.

130

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

🌐 Multilateralism is shifting. With the UNFCCC struggling on binding commitments, momentum is moving to: 🗺️The G20 🤝Plurilateral alliances (BOGA, CET-P) 🟢The newly announced 2026 Intl Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels (🇨🇴+🇳🇱)

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

🏛️Climate governance is fragmenting. Geopolitics, trade tensions & fossil fuel lobbying (1 in 25 COP30 delegates) are constraining ambition on phase-outs. 🛢️Governments are still approving new fossil fuel projects.

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

COP30 exposed three truths: ⚡The transition is accelerating - but uneven. Clean energy investment is soaring. Yet fossil fuels still dominate transport, heavy industry & buildings. 0⃣The 1.5°C carbon budget is nearly gone. 📈Fossil emissions rose 1.1% this year.

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

COP30 was billed to be the moment the world agreed a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels as part of the UN-process. Instead: the final text avoided the topic altogether. ❌No mention of coal, oil or gas, despite 86 countries calling for a roadmap.

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 24/11/2025

🌍🛢️COP30: Breaking the Deadlock - or Revealing It? Our new SUS-POL briefing by @freddiedaley.bsky.social breaks down what COP30 really delivered for fossil fuel phase-outs. sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gate... Short🧵on its main arguments👇

122

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 03/11/2025

Building clean energy is essential. But so is the deliberate, managed decline of fossil fuels. Without both, the transition risks becoming an expansion, not a transformation. 🔗Read the full piece here: nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-...

nationalinterest.org

We Cannot Lose Sight of Phasing Out Fossil Fuels

Phasing out the use of fossil fuels, not just simply rebuilding low-carbon systems, should be the goal of COP30.

040

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 03/11/2025

5️⃣ A just transition depends on workers. People in fossil fuel sectors need real, supported pathways into the low-carbon economy. They’re the ones who will build the new system, not be left behind by it.

120

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 03/11/2025

4️⃣ There are opportunities in managed decline. Decommissioning creates jobs, innovation, and regional renewal. Building this capacity alongside renewables makes economic and climate sense.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 03/11/2025

3️⃣ Breaking fossil fuel systems takes time. These infrastructures are massive, global, and built for endless growth, not decline. The work of dismantling them must begin now, not “later.”

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 03/11/2025

2️⃣ You can’t skip the fight. “Build now, break later” dodges the confrontation with fossil fuel incumbents. These firms are resisting transition, protecting profits, and keeping economies hooked on coal, oil and gas. They won’t give up power willingly - they must be pushed.

110

SUS-POL @suspol.bsky.social · 03/11/2025

1️⃣ Renewables are adding, not replacing. Global energy demand keeps rising. Clean energy is expanding the mix, but fossil fuel use is still increasing. To meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, renewables must displace fossil fuels, not just add to them.

110