{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"analysis_type":["lobbying tracking"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'lobbying tracking' for facet 'analysis_type' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":2,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?analysis_type=lobbying+tracking","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"cmw-000393","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/cmw-000393","title":"Oil spill","publisher":{"name":"Carbon Market Watch","organization":"carbon-market-watch"},"document_type":"policy brief","language":"en","date_published":"2026-02","source_url":"https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/02-2026_Oil-spill_-How-fossil-fuel-interests-are-seeping-into-the-voluntary-carbon-market-rulebook.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The report argues that fossil fuel supermajors use the voluntary carbon market (VCM) as a strategic pillar to maintain a green image while continuing carbon-intensive operations. It details how these companies and trade associations like IETA and API lobby for weaker credit quality standards and increased flexibility in offsetting Scope 3 emissions. The document specifically critiques the governance of the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) and the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI), alleging that the inclusion of industry representatives in decision-making roles creates significant conflicts of interest that risk diluting integrity standards.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Major oil and gas companies use carbon credits to create a misleading image of climate progress while continuing to prioritize fossil fuel production in their capital expenditure and long-term planning.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Oil and gas companies are among the largest buyers of carbon credits; Shell specifically has been the largest corporate buyer for three consecutive years, retiring 17.3 million credits in 2024.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Fossil fuel companies exert influence over climate policy through a network of trade associations, many of which are classified as 'oppositional' to Paris-aligned engagement.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) has lobbied for weaker carbon credit quality rules, specifically arguing against financial additionality as a sole requirement for assessing credits.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) has allowed representatives from fossil fuel companies and carbon standards to hold seats on its Governing Board, which the report describes as a conflict of interest.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) developed a Scope 3 Action Code of Practice that allows companies to use carbon credits to address Scope 3 emissions, which critics argue enables greenwashing.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The American Petroleum Institute (API) has lobbied VCMI to classify the oil and gas sector as 'hard-to-abate' to justify continued reliance on fossil fuel sales and expanded use of carbon credits.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-7","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Carbonext, a project developer in which Shell holds a minority stake, lobbied VCMI against sectoral alignment requirements that would have limited the types of credits fossil fuel companies could use.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"cmw-000393#insight-8","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["carbon offset","carbon credit","Scope 3","greenwashing","nature-based solutions","energy transition"],"geography_discussed":["European Union","United States","Brazil","Philippines"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy brief","governance analysis","lobbying tracking"]},{"id":"reclfin-000728","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/reclfin-000728","title":"OUT WITH SCIENCE, IN WITH LOBBYISTS: Gas, Nuclear and the EU Taxonomy","publisher":{"name":"Reclaim Finance","organization":"reclaim-finance"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2021-07","source_url":"https://reclaimfinance.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Report-EU-taxonomy-Out-with-science-in-with-lobbyists-RF.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The report examines how the EU sustainable taxonomy, originally designed to be science-based, has been influenced by industry lobbying to potentially include fossil gas and nuclear energy. It argues that gas is not a sustainable transition fuel due to methane leaks and carbon lock-in, and that nuclear energy fails the 'do no significant harm' (DNSH) principle due to waste and safety risks. The document details the scale of lobbying efforts, identifying hundreds of meetings between EU officials and industry representatives, and criticizes the EU Commission for deferring decisions on these technologies to future legislation and relying on flawed technical reports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Fossil gas is not a sustainable transition fuel because methane leaks can make it worse for the climate than coal if leaks exceed 3%, and its use must be drastically reduced to limit global warming to 1.5°C.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Nuclear power fails the 'do no significant harm' (DNSH) criteria due to risks of accidents, high water requirements, pollution from uranium mining, and the lack of long-term solutions for high-level radioactive waste storage.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"New nuclear energy is an inefficient tool for rapid decarbonization because construction timelines often span 10-19 years, potentially extending the operation of existing fossil-fueled plants.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Gas industry lobbying in the EU is extensive, with 182 entities spending between €64.9 and €78.4 million annually and holding 323 meetings with EU officials between January 2020 and May 2021.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Nuclear lobbying is highly concentrated, with 27 organizations spending between €6.3 and €7.9 million per year, and a significant increase in meetings with the Commission following the Technical Expert Group's (TEG) initial exclusion of nuclear.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The EU Commission's Joint Research Committee (JRC) report on nuclear energy is criticized for being incomplete, specifically failing to evaluate accident probability in old plants, long-term waste repository consequences, and water conflicts.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"While the April 2021 delegated acts did not explicitly include fossil gas, the EU Commission deferred the decision to future legislation and adopted lenient criteria for hydrogen and 'low carbon gases' that may facilitate gas financing.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"reclfin-000728#insight-7","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["natural gas","nuclear power","climate finance","methane leak","carbon capture and storage","blue hydrogen","energy transition"],"geography_discussed":["France","Finland","United States","United Kingdom"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy analysis","lobbying tracking","technical critique"]}]}