Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Earth

Half of Fossil Fuel Carbon Emissions In 2024 Came From 32 Companies (insideclimatenews.org) 31

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Inside Climate News: Just 32 companies accounted for over half of global fossil carbon emissions in 2024, according to a report published Wednesday by the U.K.-based think tank InfluenceMap. That is down from 36 companies responsible for half the global CO2 emissions in 2023, and 38 companies five years ago. The analysis is the latest update to the Carbon Majors database, which tracks the world's largest oil, gas, coal and cement producers and uses production data to calculate the carbon emissions from each entity's production. The database, first developed by researcher Richard Heede and now hosted by InfluenceMap, quantifies current and historical emissions attributable to nearly 180 companies and provides annual updates. It is the only database of its kind tracking corporate-generated carbon emissions dating back to the start of the Industrial Revolution, research that's being used in efforts to hold major polluters accountable for climate harms.

Despite dire warnings from scientists about the consequences of accelerating climate change, fossil fuel production is continuing apace. Last year, fossil fuel CO2 emissions reached a record high, topping 38 billion metric tons. In 2024 these emissions were 37.4 billion metric tons -- up 0.8 percent from 2023 -- and traceable to 166 oil, gas, coal and cement producers, according to the report. Much of the global carbon emissions in 2024 came from state-owned entities, which represented 16 of the top 20 emitters. The five largest emitters overall -- Saudi Arabia's Aramco, Coal India, China's CHN Energy, National Iranian Oil Co. and Russia's Gazprom -- were all state-controlled, and accounted for 18 percent of the total fossil CO2 emissions in 2024.

ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, ConocoPhillips and BP -- the top five emitting investor-owned companies -- together were responsible for 5.5 percent of the total emissions in that year. Historically, ExxonMobil and Chevron rank in the top five for fossil carbon emissions generated from 1854 through 2024, accounting for 2.79 percent and 3.08 percent of overall carbon pollution, respectively. According to the analysis, the 178 entities in the database have generated 70 percent of fossil CO2 emissions since the start of the Industrial Revolution, and just 22 entities are responsible for one-third of these emissions.
"Each year, global emissions become increasingly concentrated among a shrinking group of high-emitting producers, while overall production continues to grow. Simultaneously, these heavy emitters continue to use lobbying to obstruct a transition that the scientific community has known for decades is essential," said Emmett Connaire, senior analyst at InfluenceMap. The findings of the new analysis, he added, "underscore the growing importance of this kind of rigorous evidence in efforts to determine accountability for climate-related losses."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Half of Fossil Fuel Carbon Emissions In 2024 Came From 32 Companies

Comments Filter:
  • Dupe (Score:5, Informative)

    by torqer ( 538711 ) on Thursday January 22, 2026 @09:04AM (#65941570)

    El dupo.

  • Holy shit (Score:5, Informative)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Thursday January 22, 2026 @09:07AM (#65941574) Homepage Journal

    I'm still participating in discussions under the original story [slashdot.org] and there's a dupe already? Stop calling these incompetent motherfuckers "editors" please

    • This is why jobs will be replaced with AI.
    • by Tx ( 96709 )

      Don't complain, it gave you another chance to get some upvotes.

    • I'm still participating in discussions under the original story [slashdot.org] and there's a dupe already?

      I think articles that don't have duplicates are more noteworthy at this point. It seems like most all of them do of late.

  • by SlashbotAgent ( 6477336 ) on Thursday January 22, 2026 @09:08AM (#65941576)

    It appears that the editors can't even do a Ctrl+F before posting a dupe.

    Maybe Slashdot could use AI for dupe control.

    • by Sebby ( 238625 )

      You presume there's still actual humans running slashdot.

    • It appears that the editors can't even do a Ctrl+F before posting a dupe.

      Maybe Slashdot could use AI for dupe control.

      As we humans bask in the glowing dominance of AI advancing forward like a drunk toddler snorting bitcoin for breakfast, let us take a moment and recognize how a one-line script written in boomer.language might have responded to the problem of filtering duplicate content, translated with at least 17 pieces of cynical flair:

      Attention Editors. If it smells like some crap you've seen before, please check to see if you're still holding the shit-stained toilet paper in your non jerk-off hand before duping all o

  • "It's déjà vu all over again."
  • From the article...
    The findings of the new analysis, he added, "underscore the growing importance of this kind of rigorous evidence in efforts to determine accountability for climate-related losses."

    Don't make us say "stop" or we'll say "stop" again.

    • They read oil company annual reports, or more likely, someone else's summaries of those reports. And then pretended they did something worthwhile. It's a bit pathetic, I think.
    • by kenh ( 9056 )

      So all the carbon emissions are from the production of gasoline, diesel, etc, not the actual consumption of that gasoline, diesel, etc, right? Whew, that's a relief - I thought I might have to give up my ICE automobiles, but since the issue is Exxon Mobil, not the countless millions of people that burn Exxon Mobil products every day, there's no need for me to change my behavior!

  • You compiled a list of oil companies. I'm sure that was very difficult put together and you should be proud... of your ability to waste time.
    • by kenh ( 9056 )

      I guess that takes me off the hook, since I only burn gasoline driving around town - the problem is the greedy oil companies that keep restocking the local gas station for me? Great! Guess it's not my fault...

      • If you are in the situation and have the resources to switch, it's your fault.

        If not, it may well be the fault of the oil industry, their lobbyists, and their pet congresscreeps. They have been lobbying against EVs, solar power and so on for decades.

        Let's not start pretending that money doesn't influence politics.

  • by Sebby ( 238625 ) on Thursday January 22, 2026 @09:49AM (#65941656) Journal

    ...the same two "editors" [slashdot.org].

  • As long as we're mobilizing resources to fix concentrated problem causers, shall we also dispense with the performative virtue-signal nonsense re banning plastic straws and drink-stirrers in the relatively well-behaved EU and North America to instead focus our efforts on the actual sources?

    Per google-summary
    "It's not just the often memed 8 rivers, but a relatively small number of rivers, primarily in Asia, are responsible for a huge percentage (around 80-95%) of river-borne plastic pollution entering the oc

  • It's not the folks driving the ICE automobiles, the tractor-trailer trucks, or running ocean cargo ships that are causing the carbon emissions, it's the folks that sell them the gasoline, diesel fuel, and bunker oil? Interesting.

    By the same logic are hostess bakeries responsible for the obesity crisis in America, not the consumers that eat their products?

    • I'm not sure, but the figure of 5.5% of all emissions coming from the largest 5 oil majors does suggest that they do not include emissions from products they sold, but only emissions from exploration, production and refining activities. Given the energy requirements to produce oil these days, that figure is surprisingly low.
  • Customers pay companies to produce oil, and then customers burn it. Don't whine to me about how this is a conspiracy to shift blame on to the consumer. The consumer is the one that drives the whole process and creates emissions. Nothing will stop the oil companies if we keep giving them trillions of dollars for oil that we burn. Stop. Buying. Oil.
  • Emissions need to be tracked at the destination, not at the source. These statistics are just as bad as people thinking "oh, Norway stopping production of oil and gas would lead to lower emissions". In reality, it would just give more money and influence to nations that are almost universally bad - with the exception of Canada, Norway, and the UK they pretty much all are.

    Another "sideeffect" of measuring this way is that e.g. Italy, Ireland, and Spain would be considered "zero emission"... which they certai

  • The oil industry is in the hands of a relatively small number of players. This is news? That Saudi Arabia controls a lot of oil?

Cobol programmers are down in the dumps.

Working...