emissions

The Exxon gas station on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, in 2006. Exxon Mobil has sued the State of California in federal court challenging a pair of laws that require the oil giant to report climate emissions data tied to its products, worldwide. File photo by Kamenko Pajic/UPI | License Photo

Oct. 26 (UPI) — Petroleum giant Exxon Mobil has filed a federal lawsuit challenging a pair of California laws that would require the company to report greenhouse gas emissions tied to the worldwide use of its products.

The complaint, Filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, argues that the California statutes violate the company’s free speech rights by compelling it to “trumpet California’s preferred message even though Exxon Mobil believes the speech is misleading and misguided.”

Calif. SB 253, known as the Climate Corporate Data Act, requires the state’s Air Resources Board to adopt regulations that mandate private companies with more than $1billion in annual revenue to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions, indirect emissions, such as the electricity purchased by the company and emissions from the company’s supply chain, including water, water usage, business travel and employee commutes. The indirect emissions account for about two-thirds of a company’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The legislation does not require Exxon to change anything about its production process or limit what consumers can use, only that the company provide data on its emissions.

Michael Gerrard, a climate change researcher at Columbia University, said the oil giant has a long history of resisting making such information public, and said the suit reflects “Exxon’s pattern of aggressively pushing back” on any climate change-related regulation.

Supporters of the law say it discourages “corporate greenwashing,” such as marketing efforts that falsely depict a company’s efforts to reduce climate-warming emissions.

“We need the full picture to make the deep emissions cuts that scientists tell us are necessary to avert the world’s impacts of climate change,” said Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, the bill’s author.

In its lawsuit, Exxon said SB 253 and a companion measure, SB 261, would require the company to “engage in granular conjecture about unknowable future developments and to publicly disseminate that speculation on its website.”

SB 261 requires companies with revenue in excess of $500 million to disclose their climate-related financial risks.

Shipping containers are stacked on a cargo ship in Bayonne, N.J., in 2020. Now the United States, with the help of Russia and Saudi Arabia, has halted a global agreement to reduce cargo ship greenhouse gases because of the Trump administration’s view that climate change is a “scam.” File Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo

Oct. 17 (UPI) — The United States delayed the adoption of an international requirement for commercial cargo ships to reduce their greenhouse emissions or be subject to fines that is widely supported globally.

Using threats of sanctions and tariffs, and backed by Saudi Arabia and Russia, the Trump administration forced representatives of more than 100 countries to table the International Maritime Organization’s Net-zero Framework, which would have set a mandatory marine fuel standard.

The draft framework, agreed to in April and aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cargo ships to net-zero by 2050, would have gone into effect in 2027 for all ocean going ships weighing more than 5,000 tons, according to the IMO.

President Donald Trump has referred to nearly all efforts to reduce human impacts on the environment as a “green scam.”

In an Oct. 10 statement meant to put “IMO members on notice,” Trump’s secretaries of state, energy and transportation said that the United States would employ a series of penalties “against nations that sponsor this European-led neocolonial export of global climate regulations.”

“President Trump has made it clear that the United States will not accept any international environmental agreement that unduly or unfairly burdens the United States or harms the interests of the American people,” Secs. Marco Rubio, Chris Wright and Sean Duffy said in the statement.

The new regulation would have gone into effect in 2027 after a standard for ships to reduce their annual gas fuel intensity — the amount of greenhouse gases released for each unit of energy a ship uses — and economic measures and penalties were established at meetings planned for 2026.

The IMO plan was widely supported — Britain, Canada, the European Union, Japan and China were all in favor — and was expected to pass by most of the roughly 100 countries represented at Friday’s meeting.

Although a handful of countries were not in favor of delaying talks about the regulation for a year, the United States persuaded several countries, including China, to join it, Russia and Saudi Arabia to push off negotiations on the deal.

“We are disappointed that member states have not been able to agree [on] a way forward at this meeting,” International Chamber of Shipping secretary-general Thomas Kazakos told reporters.

“Industry needs clarity to be able to make investments,” he said, reiterating the already known overall support the shipping industry reportedly has for the global standard.

Members of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) have voted to postpone approving a plan to curb shipping emissions, after United States President Donald Trump threatened to impose sanctions on countries that supported the measure.

The vote on Friday set back plans to regulate the shipping industry’s contributions to climate change by at least 12 months, even though the Net Zero Framework (NZF) had already been approved by members of the London-based IMO, a United Nations body, in April.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

The decision to formally delay adopting the framework until late next year came a day after President Trump took to his Truth Social platform, saying: “I am outraged that the International Maritime Organization is voting in London this week to pass a global Carbon Tax.”

“The United States will NOT stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping,” he said, telling countries to vote against the plan.

Washington also threatened to impose sanctions, visa restrictions and port levies on countries that supported the deal.

In advance of this week’s meeting in London, about 63 IMO members who had voted for the plan in April were expected to maintain their support for curbs on emissions, and others were expected to join the initiative to formally approve the framework.

Following Trump’s social media threat, delegates in London instead voted on a hastily arranged resolution to push back proceedings on the matter, which passed by 57 votes to 49.

The IMO, which comprises 176 member countries, is responsible for regulating the safety and security of international shipping and preventing pollution on the high seas.

Since returning to power in January, Trump has focused on reversing Washington’s course on climate change, encouraging fossil fuel use by deregulation, cutting funding for clean energy projects and promising businesses to “drill, baby drill”.

‘A missed opportunity’

A spokesman for UN chief Antonio Guterres called Friday’s decisions “a missed opportunity for member states to place the shipping sector on a clear, credible path towards net zero emissions”.

The International Chamber of Shipping, representing more than 80 percent of the world’s fleet, also expressed disappointment.

“Industry needs clarity to be able to make the investments needed to decarbonise the maritime sector,” the chamber’s Secretary-General Thomas Kazakos said in a statement.

Disappointed, but still very much Committed! https://t.co/7P192kAvCx

— Thomas A. Kazakos (@ThomasKazakos) October 17, 2025

Ralph Regenvanu, the minister for climate change for Vanuatu, said the decision to delay the vote by 12 months was “unacceptable given the urgency we face in light of accelerating climate change”.

“But we know that we have international law on our side and will continue to fight for our people and the planet,” Regenvanu added.

Leading up to Friday’s decision, China, the European Union, Brazil, Britain and several other members of the IMO had reaffirmed their support.

Countries that opposed the measures included Russia and Saudi Arabia.

A Russian delegate described the proceedings as “chaos” as he addressed the plenary on Friday after talks had lasted into the early hours.

Argentina and Singapore, two countries that had previously voted in support of the framework in April, were among those that voted to postpone introducing it this week.

If it had been formally adopted this week, the Net Zero Framework (NZF) would have been the first global carbon-pricing system, charging ships a penalty of $380 per metric tonne on every extra tonne of CO2-equivalent they emit while rewarding vessels that reduce their emissions by using alternatives.

The framework plan is intended to help the IMO reach its target of cutting net emissions from international shipping by 20 percent by 2030 and eliminating them by 2050.

Climate change is already beginning to affect shipping and the safety of seafarers, including by changing ocean currents and causing more frequent and severe storms.

Proposals to reduce reliance on dirtier bunker fuel in the shipping industry include using ammonia and methanol, as well as fitting cargo ships with special sails.