CO2 / PPM /Annual Averages / Data Source: noaa.gov 1980 338.91ppm 1981 340.11ppm 1982 340.86ppm 1983 342.53ppm 1984 344.07ppm 1985 345.54ppm 1986 346.97ppm 1987 348.68ppm 1988 351.16ppm 1989 352.78ppm 1990 354.05ppm 1991 355.39ppm 1992 356.1ppm 1993 356.83ppm 1994 358.33ppm 1995 360.18ppm 1996 361.93ppm 1997 363.04ppm 1998 365.7ppm 1999 367.8ppm 2000 368.97ppm 2001 370.57ppm 2002 372.59ppm 2003 375.14ppm 2004 376.96ppm 2005 378.97ppm 2006 381.13ppm 2007 382.9ppm 2008 385.01ppm 2009 386.5ppm 2010 388.76ppm 2011 390.63ppm 2012 392.65ppm 2013 395.39ppm 2014 397.34ppm 2015 399.65ppm 2016 403.09ppm 2017 405.22ppm 2018 407.62ppm 2019 410.07ppm 2020 412.44ppm 2021 414.72ppm 2022 418.56ppm 2023 421.08ppm 2024 424.61ppm 2025 427.35ppm
CO2 / PPM /Annual Averages / Data Source: noaa.gov 1980 338.91ppm 1981 340.11ppm 1982 340.86ppm 1983 342.53ppm 1984 344.07ppm 1985 345.54ppm 1986 346.97ppm 1987 348.68ppm 1988 351.16ppm 1989 352.78ppm 1990 354.05ppm 1991 355.39ppm 1992 356.1ppm 1993 356.83ppm 1994 358.33ppm 1995 360.18ppm 1996 361.93ppm 1997 363.04ppm 1998 365.7ppm 1999 367.8ppm 2000 368.97ppm 2001 370.57ppm 2002 372.59ppm 2003 375.14ppm 2004 376.96ppm 2005 378.97ppm 2006 381.13ppm 2007 382.9ppm 2008 385.01ppm 2009 386.5ppm 2010 388.76ppm 2011 390.63ppm 2012 392.65ppm 2013 395.39ppm 2014 397.34ppm 2015 399.65ppm 2016 403.09ppm 2017 405.22ppm 2018 407.62ppm 2019 410.07ppm 2020 412.44ppm 2021 414.72ppm 2022 418.56ppm 2023 421.08ppm 2024 424.61ppm 2025 427.35ppm
News & Views

OTPP’s flawed climate strategy would allow new gas investments

As Canada's largest pension funds grapple with escalating climate-related financial risks, Patrick DeRochie, senior manager at Shift Action argues that Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan (OTPP)’s new climate strategy is a major step backwards

By Patrick DeRochie
Content Tags: Pensions  Canada 

In February, OTPP released an updated climate strategy. It incorporates some credible and forward-looking changes, but abandons much of OTPP’s previous ambition and leadership. OTPP seems to have forgotten that its mandate to protect its members’ retirement security is dependent on a stable climate.

OTPP could have met this moment of spiraling geopolitical turbulence and accelerating climate disruption by laying out a comprehensive plan to engage with policy-makers to bolster climate policy and hasten the energy transition. OTPP might have cited research showing that worsening climate impacts could devastate the economic and financial systems on which pension funds rely to generate returns. In severe climate scenarios, Canadian pension funds could see returns fall by 50% by 2040.


NZI Climate Solutions Summit | 23 June 2026 | London | register here


Instead, OTPP walked back its commitment to net-zero portfolio emissions by 2050 and “retired” or removed previously-set interim climate targets.

OTPP’s only significant remaining climate commitment is a new pledge to have $70 billion invested in its “Climate Transition Aligned Framework” by 2030, including assets it considers to be either "climate solutions” or “transition planning”. The framework “strives” to respect Indigenous rights and work toward a just transition. It also integrates a “do no significant harm” principle and states that “climate solutions” investments should not lead to carbon lock-in or the expansion of fossil fuels.

At first glance, this looks like a big, ambitious commitment – but there are major problems.

First, the rules for what gets counted towards that $70-billion commitment contain loopholes you could drive a school bus through. Under the “advancing” tier – a category in OTPP’s “transition planning” framework for private assets that have emissions reduction targets – companies that have no credible path for transitioning their businesses could be improperly labelled as “transition aligned”. The inclusion of companies with no transition pathway other than phase-out undermines the credibility of the entire $70-billion pledge.

For example, OTPP’s new framework could allow gas utilities to be counted toward its $70-billion target, doesn’t prevent new investments in fossil fuel infrastructure like LNG terminals or pipelines, and fails to plan for the required phase-out of OTPP’s existing fossil fuel assets. If a portfolio company doesn’t meet the framework’s “transition planning” criteria following a review period, the company would simply remain in OTPP’s portfolio but not be counted toward the $70-billion target.

Even the third-party validation of OTPP’s climate strategy raises questions. While it was reviewed and endorsed by the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI), the strategy doesn’t actually reference any CBI framework for transition finance – undermining the credibility of that endorsement.

Second, with its focus on private assets, OTPP’s climate strategy excludes between one-third and one-half of the portfolio. Shift’s estimate suggests that by 2030, OTPP’s target of $70 billion in “transition aligned” assets would amount to just 20% of OTPP’s portfolio. The fund also quietly changed its 2026 proxy voting guidelines to weaken climate-related expectations of publicly-traded companies – which are left out of the strategy altogether.

Third, OTPP failed to spell out how it will use its significant influence to advocate for robust climate policies that prevent carbon lock-in and accelerate the energy transition. This is particularly significant given that OTPP owns companies lobbying against climate policy and has board members who simultaneously hold positions at fossil fuel companies.

It’s especially disappointing to see OTPP abandoning its previous climate ambition when the fund could credibly point to significant progress: OTPP had surpassed its goal to reduce portfolio emissions intensity by 45% below 2019 levels by 2025. The fund had engaged with 32 portfolio companies to complete decarbonization studies and establish emissions targets, bringing OTPP close to its goal of having 67% of portfolio emissions from eligible companies covered by net-zero plans by 2025. OTPP also reached $32 billion in green investments, using credible definitions.

OTPP’s new climate framework arrives in a moment of fiduciary reckoning for pension funds. The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board faces a legal challenge alleging mismanagement of climate risks. Meanwhile, OTPP’s CEO told plan members that the fund is looking at new investments in liquefied natural gas (LNG), amidst rumours that pension funds are being arm-twisted by the federal government to invest in LNG Canada – the most polluting LNG facility in the world.

Working and retired Ontario teachers are counting on OTPP to provide a safe and dignified retirement, a prospect that looks increasingly out of reach when the institutions that control the flow of capital dial back – rather than scale up – their climate ambitions.

With so much at stake, OTPP must fix its flawed new climate strategy to meet its long-term obligations to its members.

A detailed analysis of OTPP's climate strategy by Shift can be found here.


Longview Networks | Institutional Investment Conferences & Summits 


Content Tags: Pensions  Canada 

Related Content