• LinkedIn
• WordPress
• Amazon

GLOBAL ENERGY REVOLUTION: THE PLAN TO REPLACE FOSSIL FUELS IN 4 YEARS AND SAVE THE PLANET’S FUTURE

 

Roberto Guillermo Gomes

Founding CEO of Global Solidarity / Founding CEO of Green Interbanks and Mayday.live / Leader of 2% For The Planet / Architect / Journalist / Writer / Master in Yoga / Mindfulness Expert Consultant. Creator of Neuroyoga

11 de octubre de 2024

Global Oil Sales Revenue

The total global revenue from oil sales varies depending on multiple factors, such as the price per barrel of oil, global supply and demand, and international production agreements. Below is a summary of recent data and a list of the main oil-producing countries, showing their percentage of global production and approximate annual sales.

Global Oil Sales Revenue:

• In 2023, the total revenue from global oil sales was estimated at around $2.2 trillion USD, based on average prices of approximately $80 USD per barrel.
• Global oil production has been increasing in recent years and currently stands at around 100 million barrels per day (mbpd), equivalent to more than 36.5 billion barrels per year.

Global Oil Production by Year (in million barrels per day):

• 2020: 88.4 mbpd (reduction due to the COVID-19 pandemic)
• 2021: 94.6 mbpd
• 2022: 98.3 mbpd
• 2023: 100.3 mbpd (estimate)

Top Oil-Producing Countries (2023):

1. United States Production: 11.8 mbpd Percentage of global production: 11.8% Estimated revenue: $344 billion
2. Saudi Arabia Production: 10.4 mbpd Percentage of global production: 10.4% Estimated revenue: $303 billion
3. Russia Production: 9.7 mbpd Percentage of global production: 9.7% Estimated revenue: $282 billion
4. Canada Production: 4.5 mbpd Percentage of global production: 4.5% Estimated revenue: $131 billion
5. Iraq Production: 4.3 mbpd Percentage of global production: 4.3% Estimated revenue: $126 billion
6. China Production: 4.0 mbpd Percentage of global production: 4% Estimated revenue: $116 billion
7. United Arab Emirates Production: 3.5 mbpd Percentage of global production: 3.5% Estimated revenue: $101 billion
8. Brazil Production: 3.0 mbpd Percentage of global production: 3% Estimated revenue: $87 billion
9. Iran Production: 2.7 mbpd Percentage of global production: 2.7% Estimated revenue: $78 billion
10. Kuwait Production: 2.5 mbpd Percentage of global production: 2.5% Estimated revenue: $72 billion
11. Nigeria Production: 2.1 mbpd Percentage of global production: 2.1% Estimated revenue: $60 billion
12. Mexico Production: 1.9 mbpd Percentage of global production: 1.9% Estimated revenue: $55 billion

Total Global Revenue of Top Oil Producers (estimated):

Summing the estimated sales of these top countries, the total gross revenue in 2023 would be approximately $1.75 trillion USD.

Oil Production Trends:

Production has been increasing, recovering after the COVID-19 pandemic. However, global demand is being challenged by the transition to renewable energies and concerns about climate change, raising uncertainty about long-term oil production growth.

---

Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil Fuels:

CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal) are one of the main sources of global greenhouse gas emissions. Below is a summary of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and a table showing the increase over the last 20 years.

Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil Fuels:

In 2023, global CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use (oil, natural gas, and coal) reached approximately 36.8 billion tons (gigatons or Gt) of CO2. This includes emissions from oil, natural gas, and coal, with coal being the largest individual source.

Table of CO2 Emissions Increase Over the Last 20 Years (2003–2023):

Trends Summary

• Global CO2 emissions have increased significantly over the past two decades, rising from 26.1 Gt in 2003 to 36.8 Gt in 2023, which represents an increase of more than 40% during this period.
• The 2008–2009 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 resulted in temporary emission decreases, but both were followed by strong rebounds.
• Climate policies, the transition to renewable energy, and cleaner technologies have yet to stop the growth of emissions, although there has been a slight slowdown in the growth rate in recent years.

This scenario highlights the importance of global efforts to reduce the use of fossil fuels and promote clean energy to mitigate climate change.

---

TaskJustice and Coastal Property Revaluation

To analyze the impact of combined strategies, such as lawsuits for pollution (TaskJustice) against polluting countries and companies, along with the revaluation of coastal properties based on a future global flood index, on oil demand and the transition to a cleaner energy matrix, it is crucial to break down how each of these factors affects fossil fuel consumption and what combined effect they may have on accelerating structural change in global energy demand.

1. Impact of Lawsuits for Pollution (TaskJustice)

Lawsuits for pollution have been gaining traction in several parts of the world, especially in developed countries, driven by growing awareness of climate change and the responsibility of major emitters. Several ways these lawsuits can reduce oil demand include:

• Additional costs for polluting companies: Major oil companies and countries dependent on fossil fuel extraction may face significant economic sanctions, forcing them to pay compensation for environmental damage. This can increase operational costs, decreasing oil profitability and making investments in clean energy more attractive.
• Regulatory and reputational pressure: Lawsuits also create reputational pressure on countries and polluting companies, incentivizing faster changes in their energy policies. Governments, to avoid future lawsuits, may adopt stricter regulations favoring renewable energy over fossil fuels.

Expected outcome: In the short to medium term, an increase in lawsuits could force polluting companies and countries to reduce oil production to avoid greater litigation risks, driving a shift towards clean energy and decreasing global oil consumption.

2. Revaluation of Coastal Properties Based on a Future Global Flood Index

Climate change is raising sea levels, leading to a trend of devaluation of coastal properties due to increased flood risk. The development of future risk indexes based on climate change provides a powerful tool for revaluing coastal properties and assets. These indexes include factors such as storm frequency, sea level rise, and vulnerability to flooding.

• Economic impact on coastal regions: Coastal properties have begun losing value in many vulnerable areas, affecting not only property owners but also local economies reliant on tourism and real estate.
• Investment displacement: As coastal properties lose value, investors seek safer alternatives less vulnerable to climate change. This may lead to a reorientation of investments towards clean energy technologies and more sustainable infrastructure projects.
• Reduction in fossil fuel use: Coastal areas experiencing property value decline may see less development and lower energy consumption based on oil, such as transportation and heating in these regions. In the long term, the impact on oil demand could be significant as more areas are recognized as vulnerable and governments implement policies incentivizing electrification and clean energy.

Expected outcome: Coastal property revaluation could reduce fossil fuel investments and accelerate the transition to renewable energy in areas affected by climate change, gradually reducing oil consumption.

3. Combined Impact on Oil Demand and Energy Transition

The combined impact of pollution lawsuits (TaskJustice) and coastal property revaluation based on global flood indexes could be more significant than the action of either factor alone. The combined effect could manifest in the following ways:

• Decrease in confidence in oil investments: Pollution lawsuits may increase the perception of risk around fossil fuel investments. At the same time, the negative revaluation of coastal properties could accelerate capital displacement toward safer and more sustainable sectors, reducing oil demand in transportation and industry in those areas.
• Acceleration of global climate regulation: As the effects of climate change become more evident and lawsuits increase, governments could implement stricter regulations on oil production and consumption, including carbon taxes and subsidies for clean energy.
• Investment in renewable energy: Investors and governments, seeing that the risks and costs associated with fossil fuels continue to rise (litigation, devaluations, regulatory policies), will increasingly opt to support the transition to renewable energy sources. Sectors like solar, wind, hydrogen, and energy storage will benefit from this capital shift.

Final outcome: Combined, lawsuits and the devaluation of properties vulnerable to climate change could significantly reduce oil demand in the medium to long term. This will create a strong incentive for the transition to a renewable energy-based matrix. Global policies aimed at replacing hydrocarbons will accelerate as a result of these pressures, leading to faster decarbonization and structural change in energy markets towards cleaner and more sustainable technologies.

---

Conclusion

The impact of these combined strategies will be significant in reducing global oil consumption. Lawsuits will act as an economic deterrent for polluting companies, while coastal property revaluation affected by climate change will incentivize investments in clean technologies. As these factors influence oil demand, we can expect an acceleration in the transition to a renewable energy matrix.

Cancellation of Oil Subsidies

The analysis of combining strategies, such as lawsuits against polluting countries and companies (TaskJustice) and the revaluation of coastal properties based on global flood indexes, can significantly increase the pressure to cancel subsidies for hydrocarbon production. This, in turn, would have a crucial effect on the competitiveness of clean energy over fossil fuels. Below is an analysis of how these dynamics could influence the global energy landscape:

1. Cancellation of Hydrocarbon Subsidies

Subsidies for fossil fuels have been a key factor in maintaining the competitiveness of hydrocarbons against renewable energy. According to data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), direct and indirect global fossil fuel subsidies amount to approximately $5.9 trillion USD annually, making their production and use cheaper.

• Increased political and social pressure: As lawsuits increase, governments will face growing pressure to reduce or eliminate subsidies for oil, gas, and coal production. These lawsuits could argue that financing fossil fuel production is inconsistent with global climate commitments and the need to mitigate the effects of climate change.
• Economic argument against subsidies: In addition to lawsuits, the devaluation of coastal properties and the economic damage caused by extreme weather events will create pressure on national budgets, making fossil fuel subsidies harder to justify fiscally. Governments could redirect these funds toward climate change mitigation or clean energy investments.
• Global political impact: International bodies, such as the Paris Agreement, the UN, and other international actors, will likely intensify pressure on countries to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies. This would not only reduce the competitiveness of oil compared to clean alternatives but also increase investment in renewable energy.

Expected outcome: The elimination of hydrocarbon subsidies would lead to a significant increase in the cost of oil and gas production, which would directly affect consumer prices. This would make clean energies, such as solar and wind, more competitive, accelerating the transition to a safer and cleaner energy matrix.

2. Competitiveness of Clean Energy

As the pressure to cancel hydrocarbon subsidies increases, the competitiveness of renewable energy will grow. Currently, solar and wind power are the cheapest energy sources in many regions of the world, with levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) significantly lower than those of fossil fuel plants.

• Cost reduction in clean energy: Renewable energy has seen notable cost reductions due to technological investment and economies of scale. Solar energy, for example, has reduced its costs by 89% since 2010, and costs are expected to continue falling as investment in R&D, infrastructure, and large-scale deployment increases.
• Investment flow towards clean energy: As fossil fuel subsidies decrease, and oil companies face higher operational costs due to litigation and regulations, investors will seek safer and more profitable alternatives, such as renewable energy. This will create a virtuous cycle: more investment in clean energy will further reduce its expansion costs, increasing its competitiveness against fossil fuels.
• Energy diversification and security: Clean energy, besides being cheaper in the long term, offers additional benefits in terms of energy security and resilience to extreme climate events. As renewable energy costs continue to decline, the global energy sector is expected to diversify, reducing dependence on centralized and volatile energy sources like oil.

Expected outcome: The competitiveness of clean energy will increase as fossil fuel costs rise due to the elimination of subsidies and heightened regulatory and judicial pressure. This transition will encourage a greater flow of investments into clean technologies, further reducing costs and increasing their economic viability.

3. Combined Impact on the Energy Matrix

The combined effect of canceling hydrocarbon subsidies and the increase in investment in clean energy can trigger a profound structural change in the global energy matrix. Key factors include:

• Increase in oil prices: Without subsidies, oil and other fossil fuel prices will no longer be artificially low, which will directly affect demand. This will not only boost the use of renewable energy but also accelerate the electrification of key sectors, such as transportation and industry.
• Global regulatory changes: As more countries begin to implement carbon taxes and eliminate subsidies, international energy markets could shift in favor of renewable energy, especially in developed economies that are already transitioning to cleaner and safer energy sources.
• Lower costs of renewable expansion: With a constant flow of investments into clean energy and the reduction of technological costs, the expansion of these energy sources will accelerate. The fall in costs for technologies like energy storage (batteries) and green hydrogen will be key to replacing fossil fuels in sectors that are harder to electrify.

Conclusion

The combined strategies of lawsuits against polluters and the revaluation of coastal properties vulnerable to climate change will likely significantly increase the pressure to cancel subsidies for hydrocarbon production. This would be a fatal blow to the fossil fuel industry, as final prices would no longer be competitive compared to clean energy. As oil prices rise and investment flows toward safer and cleaner alternatives, the expansion costs of renewable energy will decrease further, accelerating the transition to a renewable energy-based matrix and ensuring the decarbonization of the global economy.

---

Redirecting Oil Subsidies and Investing in Advanced Technologies

The scenario of canceling oil subsidies and redirecting those funds toward reducing the cost of alternative energy, combined with intensive investment in advanced technologies like nuclear fusion reactors and deep geothermal energy (using technologies such as those developed by Quaise Energy), would have a transformative impact on the global energy system. Here’s an analysis of how these dynamics could influence the energy future:

1. Redirecting Funds to Reduce Alternative Energy Costs

Canceling fossil fuel subsidies would free up enormous financial resources. As mentioned earlier, direct and indirect subsidies for fossil fuels total $5.9 trillion USD annually. If a significant portion of these funds were directed toward clean energy development, the impacts would be profound.

• Acceleration of renewable energy competitiveness: Solar and wind energy are already competitive in many regions of the world, but with a significant capital injection, these technologies could become even more affordable. This would allow for greater adoption in developing countries, which often struggle with initial financing for large-scale renewable infrastructure deployments.
• Modern energy infrastructure: Part of the funds could be used to modernize the electrical grid to make it more adaptable to renewable intermittency. This would include energy storage systems (long-duration batteries) that would allow for balancing supply and demand, making renewable energy more viable on a continuous and reliable basis.
• Investment multiplier effect: Redirected public funds would also attract private investment into clean energy projects, as investors seek opportunities in sectors now supported by state funding. This would create a positive investment cycle, further reducing clean energy costs.

Expected outcome: Redirecting funds previously used to subsidize fossil fuels would make clean energy more affordable and competitive in all markets. This would accelerate the energy transition and increase the penetration of renewables in key sectors, such as transportation, industry, and electricity generation.

2. Intensive Development of Nuclear Fusion Reactors

Nuclear fusion, if achieved commercially, could revolutionize global energy. The technology promises a practically limitless, clean, and safe energy source. Investing part of the funds freed from oil subsidies into fusion reactor development could accelerate the time needed to reach commercialization.

• Accelerated research and development: Currently, advances in nuclear fusion, led by projects such as ITER and private companies like Helion Energy, are progressing, but require decades of investment. Redirecting funds from fossil fuel subsidies toward fusion research could reduce the development timeline, with a potential goal of commercial fusion reactors within the next two decades.
• Decentralization of research: Investing not only in large projects like ITER but also in multiple decentralized initiatives worldwide could accelerate the development of different technological approaches to fusion. These include technologies like aneutronic fusion or compact reactors that are easier to implement.
• Long-term impact on the energy matrix: Once commercialized, fusion reactors could replace coal, gas, and oil plants in many parts of the world. This would significantly reduce CO2 emissions and eliminate dependence on unstable and polluting energy sources.

Expected outcome: Intensive development of nuclear fusion technologies, driven by the injection of freed funds, could accelerate the commercial deployment of this revolutionary energy source. In the long term, fusion could provide clean and cheap energy, eliminating the need for fossil fuels in many sectors.

3. Investment in Deep Geothermal Technology (Quaise Energy and Similar)

Deep geothermal technology, such as that being developed by Quaise Energy, has the potential to harness Earth’s heat at depths where geothermal energy is practically limitless. This approach allows drilling beyond current technological limitations to reach temperatures that can generate efficient energy anywhere in the world, not just in geologically active zones.

• Access to global geothermal energy: Quaise’s deep drilling technology could allow many countries to access geothermal energy that was previously unattainable. This is especially relevant in regions that lack natural resources like constant sunlight or wind but could generate electricity from Earth’s heat.
• Baseload energy: Unlike solar or wind, deep geothermal provides a constant baseload energy source, similar to nuclear energy or fossil fuels. This makes it ideal for complementing intermittent renewables and providing a more stable energy matrix.
• Massive deployment: By investing heavily in this technology, the initial installation and drilling costs could decrease, making deep geothermal a viable option in more parts of the world. Additionally, the technology’s affordability would enable massive deployment in rural areas and developing countries that often lack access to reliable energy.

Expected outcome: The development of deep geothermal technologies would transform countries’ ability to generate clean and constant energy. Being more economical and accessible, deep geothermal would complement other renewable sources like solar and wind, providing a solid foundation for a fully fossil-fuel-free energy matrix.

4. Combined Impact on the Global Energy Matrix

If fossil fuel subsidies are canceled and these funds are redirected toward renewable energy, nuclear fusion, and deep geothermal technologies, the result would be a structural shift in the global energy system:

• Definitive displacement of fossil fuels: With greater investment in renewable energy and baseload technologies like nuclear fusion and geothermal, fossil fuels would lose their economic and practical relevance. Oil and gas prices would rise without subsidies, making clean alternatives the preferred option for both consumers and businesses.
• Drastic reduction in CO2 emissions: With a clean energy matrix including solar, wind, geothermal, and nuclear fusion, global CO2 emissions could be reduced significantly. This would help meet the climate targets of the Paris Agreement and mitigate the worst effects of climate change.
• Innovation and job creation in advanced tech sectors: Investing in fusion and deep geothermal technologies would create a new era of technological innovation, with millions of jobs in highly specialized sectors. This positive effect on the economy would be similar to the technological boom of the 20th century but focused on clean and sustainable technologies.

Conclusion

The scenario of canceling hydrocarbon subsidies and redirecting these funds toward renewable energy, along with the development of nuclear fusion and deep geothermal technologies, has the potential to radically transform the global energy matrix. This would not only make clean energy more affordable and accessible but also accelerate the transition to a carbon-free energy future. The combination of these factors would reduce dependence on fossil fuels, stabilize energy supply, and mitigate climate change, creating a safer, cleaner, and more sustainable energy system for the future.

Replacing the Energy Matrix in 4 Years

The analysis of implementing measures to replace the consumption of hydrocarbons within a maximum period of four years, without generating interruptions in the production and consumption chain, is feasible if well-planned and staggered strategies are adopted. Below is a detailed explanation of how a rapid and effective transition can be achieved, minimizing negative impacts on the economy and supply chains.

1. Staggered Implementation Strategy

A rapid, staggered transition toward clean energy requires careful planning to avoid sudden disruptions in energy supply that could lead to shortages, energy inflation, or paralysis in key sectors. The goal is to progressively reduce hydrocarbon use while simultaneously increasing clean energy production and developing advanced technologies.

• Phase 1 (Year 1): Initial 20-25% reduction in hydrocarbon consumption. Measures: Reduce fossil fuel subsidies in less sensitive sectors (such as private transportation), provide massive incentives for electric vehicles (EV), and expand fast-charging infrastructure. Results: Decreased oil demand in mass consumption sectors and land transportation, mitigating the initial effects on industry.
• Phase 2 (Year 2): Substitute 35-40% of consumption. Measures: Massive deployment of renewable technologies (solar, wind) in electrical grids. Apply carbon taxes to high-energy-consuming companies to accelerate the transition to clean alternatives. Initiate deep geothermal projects in areas with accessible resources. Results: Substantial reduction in electricity demand based on fossil fuels and improved energy stability due to diversification of sources.
• Phase 3 (Year 3): Additional 60-70% reduction. Measures: Intensive implementation of small and modular nuclear reactors (or experimental fusion), expansion of energy storage infrastructure to ensure stable renewable energy supply, and deployment of advanced geothermal technologies. Results: A significant increase in clean energy capacity to replace most of the hydrocarbon consumption in key sectors, such as heavy industry and electricity generation.
• Phase 4 (Year 4): Eliminate 90-100% of hydrocarbon consumption. Measures: Complete substitution of fossil fuels in transportation and industry through full electrification and the use of green hydrogen or advanced biofuels. Final implementation of fusion technologies (depending on progress) and maximization of deep geothermal across various regions. Results: The energy matrix diversifies and stabilizes, allowing hydrocarbons to be fully eliminated in key sectors without interruptions in production or consumption chains.

2. Key Factors for a Staggered Transition

• Incentives for private investment: To ensure a smooth transition, the private sector must receive clear incentives to invest in clean infrastructure. This could include tax exemptions, direct subsidies for renewable energy projects, and accessible financing for companies that adopt clean technologies.
• Accelerated infrastructure deployment: The development of renewable energy infrastructure, such as solar, wind, and geothermal plants, as well as EV charging station networks, must be planned and executed on a massive and efficient scale. Energy storage (large-scale batteries) will be essential to ensure a constant supply and avoid grid disruptions.
• Promoting energy efficiency: During this transition period, greater energy efficiency should be promoted across all sectors. Building efficiency technologies, improvements in industrial processes, and transportation optimization will reduce energy consumption and accelerate the transition without compromising production.

3. Impact on the Production and Consumption Chain

Implementing this staggered transition would not only avoid interruptions but could also generate a positive economic boost, creating new job opportunities and fostering advanced technology sectors.

• Impact on industry: With a staggered transition, industries that currently depend on fossil fuels would have time to adapt, whether through electrification, the use of hydrogen technologies, or the adoption of renewable energy. This would avoid abrupt factory closures or the relocation of industries due to their inability to compete.
• Supply chain security: Diversification of the energy matrix will reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels, which will increase energy security and mitigate risks associated with oil price fluctuations or global supply interruptions.
• Regional development: The implementation of technologies such as deep geothermal energy or modular nuclear reactors can bring economic benefits to regions that previously lacked their own energy resources, promoting regional development and creating resilience in vulnerable areas.

4. Expected Results

• Economic savings: The cancellation of fossil fuel subsidies, along with investment in clean energy, would generate long-term savings for both governments and companies. Renewable energy and advanced technologies like nuclear fusion and deep geothermal would offer a lower levelized cost of energy (LCOE) than fossil fuels, making energy more accessible and affordable in the future.
• Accelerated emissions reduction: This transition within a four-year timeframe would drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, aligning with global climate goals and reducing the risk of severe impacts from climate change.
• Energy stability: Energy diversification, based on renewables, fusion, and geothermal, would provide stability to the electrical grid, reducing dependence on volatile fossil fuels and allowing economies to continue growing sustainably.

Conclusion

The proposed measures can be implemented immediately and in stages to replace hydrocarbon consumption within a maximum of four years, without causing significant interruptions in the production and consumption chain. The key lies in a progressive strategy that fosters the development of clean infrastructure and establishes appropriate financial incentives. In this way, a safe, rapid, and economically viable energy transition can be guaranteed, with long-term environmental and economic benefits.

EcoBuddha Maitreya, World Leader in the Fight against Global Warming

Fight Against Global Warming – Global Coordination Center

«If there is someone more intelligent, strategic, visionary, effective, and incorruptible than I am to lead the planet toward ending hunger, extreme poverty, global warming, and achieving world peace, I am willing to step down and follow them. But if no one is better prepared, then join me. This is our last chance to save the world.» EcoBuddha Maitreya

A Better World, Now Possible!

EcoBuddha Maitreya

©2025. All rights reserved. Conditions for publication of Maitreya Press notes