Are Climate ‘Solutions’ Keeping Us Locked Into Fossil Fuels?

Fossil fuel companies are doing and talking more than ever about net zero, clean energy, and climate solutions. But research suggests that this growing wave of green messaging may be doing something more than polishing reputations; it may be contributing to our continual entrenchment in the current fossil fuel monopoly.

A research paper has come out of a collaboration between the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology in the Autonomous University of Barcelona, and the Centre for Global Political Economy in the University of Sussex which can be summarised with one simple question. Considering that to reach net zero the economy needs to transition away from fossil fuels, climate solutions and environmental claims need to be examined through the lens of their impact on fossil fuel consumption or production. A logical question follows: When a fossil fuel company uses a clean technology, does it result in an actual reduction in oil and gas production and combustion, or does it facilitate their continued use?

Stripping away PR and technical language, this question cuts to the heart of the energy transition. According to the findings, many widely promoted ‘solutions’ used within the fossil fuel value chain fall into the latter category.

‘False Solutions’.

Drawing from the Global Atlas of Environmental Justice (EJAtlas) – a database of over 4,350 projects worldwide facing explicit environmental backlash from local communities – the research paper selected and analysed 48 projects (as seen in Figure 1) that are typically seen as central to climate action, including renewable energy, carbon capture, hydrogen, and biofuels. The study argues that these clean technologies can be exploited by actors as ‘false solutions’ who intend to perpetuate the fossil fuel systems driving the climate crisis.

Simply put, the key finding is that these technologies are used for greenwashing by fossil fuel companies who deploy them to “green” their image and slow down the very transition they are meant to enable.

When clean technologies are used within the fossil fuel industry’s value chain to project an image of sustainability, they become what researchers call ‘false solutions’: interventions that appear to address climate change while, in practice, extending the life of fossil fuel systems and relieving pressure for the transformative change that is actually required – the complete phase-out of fossil fuels.

Figure 1 - Global distribution of 48 environmental conflicts of fossil fuel companies in the energy transition documented in the EJAtlas.

How The Fossil Fuel Industry Uses Clean Energy to Its Advantage.

One of the most striking findings is how renewable energy is used by part of the fossil fuel industry.

In several cases, solar and wind projects are deployed not to replace fossil fuels, but to support oil and gas operations. An example comes from two offshore wind projects in Norway (Case 1 and 2), which are built to power existing oil extraction operations. By using cheaper renewable energy to power extraction processes, fossil fuel companies (sometimes publicly owned) can reduce their operational costs and increase their overall profitability.

In effect, cheaper renewable energy can make it more viable to continue extracting fossil fuels. At the same time, these projects allow companies to present themselves as investing in climate solutions, creating a powerful reputational benefit alongside economic gains.

Beyond renewables, other technologies play a similar role. Carbon capture, hydrogen, and related approaches are often designed to integrate directly into existing fossil fuel systems. Rather than replacing those systems, they extend their lifespan, reduce the urgency of phase-out, and enable continued production under a lower-carbon narrative. This creates a pathway where fossil fuels are not phased out but adapted and sustained.

From Greenwashing to Obstruction

Alongside these technological strategies is a shift in communication, as detailed by a report from the BMC Energy, Sustainability and Society journal.

Fossil fuel companies have continuously adapted their messaging strategically to safeguard their business-as-usual model against the growing understanding of global warming and the need for a renewable energy transition. Fossil fuel companies have shifted from outright denial of their role in global warming to a more nuanced strategy that positions their industry as an essential “partner” to renewable energy that would make up for the latter’s supposed unreliability. While increasingly emphasising net zero commitments and clean energy investments, their messaging often sends mixed signals: publicly supporting the energy transition while simultaneously reinforcing the continued necessity of fossil fuels, framing renewable energy as an insufficient and costly solution that needs fossil fuels to work.

The result is something more than greenwashing: by presenting fossil fuels as part of of the solution, this messaging blurs the line between real and ineffective action, reinforces the idea that current systems can continue with minor adjustments, and undermines the need for rapid, structural change.

Why This Matters Now.

These two papers highlight how clean technologies are used by the fossil fuel industry for both safeguarding their operations and painting fossil fuels as necessary for the transition. They are used by fossil fuel-based systems to absorb pressure for change while maintaining its core structure.

Nonetheless, the global climate crisis requires a rapid and complete phase-out of unabated fossil fuel use, with the goal of reaching either zero fossil fuels by mid-century or only residual use paired with CCS. However, current promoted green solutions are being used to facilitate continued fossil fuel production and to undermine the green transition away from fossil fuels – and the fossil fuel industry is muddying the waters by painting a picture where fossil fuels are a part of the solution and where CCS is more scalable than it really is.

The findings point to the need for greater scrutiny of projects that fall within the fossil fuel industry or perpetuate harm to the environment – measuring progress against fossil fuel reductions or emissions reductions in Scopes 1-3.

What Can Membership Bodies Do?

For membership organisations working towards net zero, these findings raise an important challenge; how do we distinguish between genuine progress and solutions that risk delaying it? A useful starting point is to ask the same question highlighted by the research: “Does this initiative lead to a real reduction in fossil fuel production, or does it enable its continuation?”

More generally, associations can also support the transition away from fossil fuels and towards low-carbon energy.

From there, membership bodies can:

• Scrutinise partnerships and sponsors - assess whether organisations are supporting solutions that phase out fossil fuels, or those that extend their use.

• Interrogate climate claims - look beyond headline commitments and examine how technologies are being deployed in practice.

• Support informed decision-making - equip members with clear, evidence-based frameworks to evaluate the use of clean technologies within their operations.

• Create space for critical discussion - encourage open dialogue about the risks of ‘false solutions’ and the complexity of the transition.

• Sustainability engagement – support decarbonisation efforts by promoting solutions and measuring them against actual emissions.

By taking these steps, membership bodies can play a key role in ensuring that climate action is not only visible, but effective.

If you are a membership body and would like to contribute towards advancing real change, join CAFA today.