Summary written by Sidonie Wittman
As climate change accelerates, calls to phase out fossil fuels have grown while pushback to do so has also strengthened.
On October 28, 2025, the Climate Solutions Research Collective hosted a Climate Conversation with presenters Professors Philippe LeBillon (Geography, IRES, SPPGA) and Kathryn Harrison (Political Science) explored the challenges and opportunities for cutting fossil fuels both in Canada and globally. Importantly they noted that many policies continue to put the focus on consumption rather than production and discussed the supply-side climate policies in Canada, designed to limit fossil fuel extraction rather than just its use.
Philippe LeBillon began by sharing examples of three main pathways to supply side action: localized resistance groups, coalitions or clubs, and international treaties.
- Localized resistance refers to actions that emerge against particular projects such as pipelines or plants. This type of action can be effective in the local context but is often difficult to scale up.
- Coalitions or clubs work to bring action up from a specific issue or project, to a larger scale. For example, the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance seeks collective commitments from nations to phase out production; however so far the group has attracted mostly non-producer countries.
- International treaties could offer real leverage, but also face steep political hurdles and difficulties in getting support from oil and gas producing countries. One such effort, the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative is a campaign to create a negotiating mandate for a Fossil Fuel Treaty, and has been formally supported by 17 countries, most of which are small island nations, along with many individuals, international organizations, and subnational governments including British Columbia.
Each approach carries unique potential, and unique political challenges.
Dr. Le Billon emphasized the continued combined effort towards a mixture of these pathways could result in the fossil fuel reduction we need.
Kathryn Harrison brought the issue home to Canada, the fourth largest exporter of oil globally and the world’s sixth largest exporter of gas. Most of what Canada extracts is burned abroad, and she noted “that distinction has some really important political implications.” Canada’s emissions accounting excludes those ‘downstream’ emissions, allowing it to claim climate leadership while ramping up production.
This logic fuels a paradox: The argument put forward is that if Canada does not produce oil and gas, it will simply be produced elsewhere and perhaps with lower environmental and safety standards, even claiming that continued exports are needed to fund domestic emission reductions. This last argument prioritizes accounting while worsening the global climate crisis, the impacts of which fall most heavily on the Global South.
Dr. Harrison explained that this strategy is both environmentally and economically shortsighted, as Canada is either “contributing to a glut” in doing so risking financial losses through overproduction, or “banking on a failure to limit warming”, as the healthy market for increasing oil and gas production (including Liquefied Natural Gas) only exists “if the world isn’t making progress on climate action”. She explained that even if Canada wanted to prioritize economic gain over stopping climate change, Canada is "competitively disadvantaged” in a decarbonizing global economy, as Canadian oil is more difficult and more expensive to produce, so “we will not be the last producer standing”.
With Canada’s unique position as a global exporter of oil and gas, global cooperation on fossil fuel supply could be an effective way forward.
Both presenters pointed out that these conversations will continue at COP30 in Belém this year, spurred by calls from activists and scholars. Dr. Harrison expressed optimism around a shift to renewable energy generation, which is falling in cost to produce. As more countries take up renewable energy, Canada will have less of a market for exports. The strategies that Dr. Le Billon outlined all start with increased pressure on all levels of government, and it is that increased political will that is necessary to keep our fossil fuels in the ground.
Stay tuned for future Climate Conversations on the Proliferation of Renewables, another on Critical Minerals and a panel on the growth of Electric Vehicles. Sign up for our newsletter to hear of confirmed dates.