Search Climate Insights Directory

The report outlines technical and operational measures to mitigate methane emissions from landfills in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), where waste management emissions accounted for 10,258 kt in 2023. It categorizes disposal sites into dumpsites, controlled landfills, and sanitary landfills, emphasizing that daily operational practices—such as waste compaction, daily cover application, and leachate management—significantly impact emissions even without advanced gas capture infrastructure. The document details specific equipment requirements, slope stability guidelines, and gas collection system designs, noting that while optimal capture efficiencies can exceed 80%, many regional facilities operate between 20% and 60%. Additionally, it advocates for organic waste diversion through composting and anaerobic digestion, drawing on European precedents, and stresses the necessity of multi-level capacity building for operators and policymakers to ensure sustainable mitigation.

The document outlines a comprehensive framework for LDAR programs, emphasizing that well-implemented programs can reduce methane leaks by nearly 80%. It details the technical application of OGI cameras, a structured nine-step survey process—from planning to data reporting—and a typology of common leak sources such as valves, flanges, and compressor seals. The guide also provides regulatory benchmarks for survey frequency, repair timelines, and reporting templates to ensure accountability and effectiveness in methane mitigation.

The document analyzes methane emissions in Algeria's oil and gas sector, estimating annual emissions at 2,304 kt. It finds that 41% of these emissions can be abated using low-cost technologies, with the highest potential coming from eliminating unlit flaring and implementing leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs. The analysis highlights that the lack of a dedicated methane regulatory framework and low domestic gas prices hinder mitigation, while the EU Methane Regulation presents a significant external driver for alignment to maintain market access.

The document analyzes methane abatement in Egypt's oil and gas sector, identifying a technical abatement potential of 35% of estimated emissions using four key technologies. All analyzed measures fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/t CH4, with leak detection and repair (LDAR) and the elimination of unlit flaring offering the most significant opportunities. The analysis highlights that the economic viability of these measures depends heavily on the ability to monetize recovered gas, which is currently hindered by infrastructure gaps and low domestic gas prices. While Egypt lacks a dedicated methane regulatory framework, the document notes a recent agreement to develop a methane reduction roadmap and recommends prioritizing low-cost measures like LDAR and flaring monitoring in the near term.

The document analyzes methane emissions in Libya's oil and gas sector, estimating annual emissions at 1,221 kt. It finds that 55% of these emissions can be abated using four specific technologies—leak detection and repair (LDAR), vapor recovery units (VRU), replacing gas-driven pneumatic equipment, and improving flaring practices—all of which fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/t CH4. The largest potential for reduction comes from eliminating unlit flaring in the onshore upstream segment. However, implementation is hindered by the lack of a dedicated methane regulatory framework, aging infrastructure, and import restrictions on specialized equipment. The report highlights that the EU Methane Regulation poses a future risk to Libyan exports starting in 2027, urging the adoption of flaring performance standards and financial incentives to meet a 2030 zero-flaring ambition.

The document analyzes methane abatement in Mexico's oil and gas sector, finding that 34% of estimated emissions can be reduced using low-cost technologies. While Mexico has a robust regulatory framework, implementation is hindered by enforcement capacity and infrastructure gaps. The most significant abatement potential lies in improving offshore flaring practices, while midstream leak detection and repair (LDAR) can offer negative abatement costs due to the monetization of recovered gas.

The document analyzes methane abatement in Nigeria's oil and gas sector, focusing on four technologies: leak detection and repair (LDAR), vapor recovery units (VRU), replacement of natural gas-driven pneumatic equipment, and improved flaring practices. It finds that 30% of estimated emissions (53.5 Mt CO2e) are technically abatable using these technologies, with 28% falling below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/t CH4. The analysis highlights that the economics of abatement depend heavily on the ability to monetize recovered gas, with some measures showing negative costs. While Nigeria has a regulatory framework targeting zero routine flaring by 2030, implementation is uneven, particularly between onshore and offshore assets. The report recommends strengthening enforcement, developing measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) systems, and utilizing targeted financial instruments like concessional loans to overcome barriers such as high import costs and infrastructure gaps.

The report evaluates methane abatement in Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Ghana, Libya, Mexico, and Nigeria, focusing on leak detection and repair (LDAR), vapor recovery units (VRUs), improved flaring practices, and replacing gas-driven pneumatic equipment. Using a bottom-up marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) approach, the study finds that most mitigation measures fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/tCH4 (20 USD/tCO2e). The economic viability of these measures is heavily dependent on the ability to monetize recovered gas, with LDAR and pneumatic equipment replacement often yielding negative marginal costs (net savings) when gas prices are sufficiently high. The report identifies significant structural barriers, including infrastructure gaps and limited local technical capacity, and recommends a combination of regulatory frameworks, targeted financial incentives, and infrastructure investment to accelerate deployment.

The document analyzes methane abatement through improved flaring practices in nine African and Latin American countries. It identifies removing unlit flaring as a priority low-cost action and notes that while most measures fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/tCH4, costs vary by country based on flaring volumes per site. Key barriers include regulatory focuses on flaring volumes rather than efficiency and high operation and maintenance requirements.

The document evaluates the replacement of methane-bleeding pneumatic devices in the oil and gas sector with electric or instrument air systems. It finds that while adoption is already medium-to-high in several assessed countries, the remaining abatement potential is cost-effective, with instrument air systems often falling below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/tCH4. Key barriers to further deployment include technical constraints at aging facilities and weak economic incentives where gas has low commercial value.

The report examines the potential of the EU's CSRD and CSDDD to drive methane emission reductions in the meat and dairy industries. While the CSRD mandates transparency and disclosure of greenhouse gas data, the CSDDD requires companies to act on adverse environmental and health impacts. The document highlights that despite 'simplification' via the Omnibus I process—which reduced the number of companies in scope and removed specific climate transition plan requirements from the CSDDD—these directives still provide levers to address methane as a precursor to ground-level ozone. It argues that mandatory reporting and due diligence can prevent companies from relying on 'end of pipe' solutions like biogas and instead push for upstream mitigation.

The document examines how the reliance on consensus in the UNFCCC has led to a 'race to the bottom,' resulting in watered-down agreements on fossil fuels, science-based targets, and loss and damage. It proposes two procedural pathways for reform: adopting the long-delayed draft Rules of Procedure or amending the Convention itself. To support this, the author provides a comparative analysis of other UN institutions and multilateral environmental agreements—such as the Montreal Protocol and the Green Climate Fund—that successfully utilize voting to break deadlocks and advance substantive goals.

The report finds that between 2019 and 2025, 240 global banks provided US$590.8 billion to the top fifteen petrochemical companies, with a high concentration of funding from US, Japanese, Chinese, German, and UK institutions. Institutional investors held US$146.6 billion in exposure to these companies as of September 2025, dominated by US-based asset managers like Vanguard and BlackRock. The document argues that this financing persists despite structural risks such as overcapacity and collapsing profit margins, and often contradicts the public climate commitments of the financial institutions involved.

The document analyzes how the plastics industry employs nine recurring disinformation frames—ranging from denialism and victim blaming to the promotion of pseudo-solutions like chemical recycling—to protect its legitimacy and deflect responsibility for plastic pollution. It argues that these narratives are amplified by digital algorithms and AI, and recommends upstream policy interventions, including production caps and legal accountability for producers, to address the root causes of the plastics crisis.

The report argues that current transition finance frameworks lack the systemic safeguards necessary to prevent carbon lock-in, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors. It proposes moving from asset-level financing to a systemic approach underpinned by Paris-aligned, subnational net-zero pathways. The document examines the gap between corporate transition plans and the requirements for credible transition finance, noting that many high-emitting oil, gas, and agrifood entities lack mature strategies. It advocates for the use of Paris-aligned taxonomies to ensure that use-of-proceeds (UoP) instruments drive genuine decarbonisation without creating 'dead-end pathways'.

The report examines the legal and administrative challenges of removing obsolete river barriers in Poland, Finland, and France. It finds that while France employs a systemic approach with prioritised lists and dedicated funding, Poland lacks a comprehensive registry and effective enforcement of removal obligations. Finland relies heavily on voluntary cooperation and funding through the NOUSU program but struggles with the permanence of water permits. The document recommends that Member States adopt systemic policies, maintain field-verified barrier registries, establish clear prioritisation criteria for 'obsolete barriers', and create inclusive funding schemes to meet EU nature restoration targets.

The report finds that the UK lacks a robust system for publicly identifying the ultimate beneficial ownership of commercial fishing vessels, with UBO easily identifiable in only 24% of sampled vessels. It argues that current vessel registration and licensing processes do not require UBO disclosure, and the Companies House 'People with Significant Control' (PSC) register is often insufficient due to high ownership thresholds and the use of foreign corporate structures. To combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, the report recommends reducing the UBO disclosure threshold to 10% or less, mandating UBO collection during registration and licensing, and establishing a centralised, publicly accessible UBO register for commercial fishing vessels.

The report argues that Canada's historical advantage of low-cost electricity is at risk due to outdated grid infrastructure, cautious energy planning, and policy instability. By comparing Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec with international peers like Texas and Germany, the analysis finds that Canadian grids often under-plan for industrial growth and lag in flexibility and transmission capacity. The document recommends that the federal government support interprovincial coordination, provide targeted funding for grid expansion, ensure a stable Clean Electricity Regulation, and prioritize grid flexibility to maintain industrial competitiveness.

The document outlines a comparative framework using six indicators—energy planning, flexible grid planning, transmission planning, electricity procurement, industrial rate modernization, and climate policy predictability—to assess the competitiveness of jurisdictions including Ontario, Alberta, Quebec, British Columbia, Germany, the UK, Norway, New South Wales, Washington, and Texas.

The report finds that Canadian provinces are generally underplanning for industrial electricity demand and lagging in system flexibility and transmission build-out compared to international peers. While hydro-led provinces like Quebec and British Columbia have inherent flexibility advantages, non-hydro jurisdictions like Alberta and Ontario need to proactively build capacity. The report recommends that the federal government support interprovincial energy planning, deploy the national balance sheet for anticipatory grid build-out, implement flexible Clean Electricity Regulations, and prioritize system flexibility in federal programs.