Pressure

• Such a phase-out requires international cooperation to restrict the supply of fossil fuels, including coal, oil and gas.
• If such cooperative efforts are pursued alongside ambitious action to tackle the demand for fossil fuels, it could lead to environmental and economic benefits.
• Some countries are already taking unilateral action to restrict fossil fuels, by, for instance, banning new oil and gas exploration or extraction.
• While no international agreement on limiting the supply of fossil fuels yet exists, there are precursors which have tended to take two different forms.

Who’s in? Who’s out?

• They would be followed by countries that have low reserves and low profits from fossil fuels, such as Argentina, Brazil, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico and Turkey.
• Our data suggests that petrostates such as Russia and Saudi Arabia would be the most reluctant to join because fossil fuel production is so central to their economies.

• We acknowledge that our scenarios for international efforts to phase out fossil fuels are not necessarily aligned with geopolitical realities.
• For one, there is the shaky relationship between key countries such as the US and China to consider.
• A club of like-minded countries could pave the way for a wider coalition, but major fossil fuel producers would need to join eventually for it to succeed.

Economic consequences

• Fossil fuel prices will inevitably rise as their supply is squeezed by a phase-out.
• Only phasing out oil may result in higher economic costs, due to its ubiquity in global supply chains and production processes.
• International cooperation will be crucial, especially to lessen the economic impact on developing countries that are heavily dependent on imported fossil fuels.

• Lauri Peterson received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement no.
• Panagiotis Fragkos received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement no.