Search Climate Insights Directory

The Papua LNG project, led by TotalEnergies, faces delays and rising costs, with estimates increasing from US$10 billion to US$18 billion. While some banks have declined direct financing due to climate policies, others continue to fund the project's developers. The project is projected to emit over 220 million tonnes of CO2, increasing Papua New Guinea's industrial and energy sector emissions by 7%, and poses significant risks to biodiversity and local communities in the Gulf Province. Critics argue that investing in renewable energy would be more cost-effective and beneficial for the country's electricity needs.

The report details ADNOC's plans to increase oil production by 25% by 2030, identifying it as a major global expansionist whose activities are largely incompatible with IEA Net Zero scenarios. It highlights the involvement of international 'carbon majors' and banks in financing these projects, the use of carbon capture for enhanced oil recovery, and the threat posed to the Marawah Biosphere Reserve by the Ghasha Mega Project.

Two years after the Paris financial center committed to coal exit strategies, Reclaim Finance finds a mixed record. While 24 of 54 analyzed actors have robust policies, others lack them entirely or have significant gaps, such as failing to exclude coal developers or lacking clear exit dates. Major banks like BNP Paribas, Société Générale, Crédit Agricole, and Natixis remain under scrutiny for continuing to support coal companies without credible transition plans.

The report highlights a significant gap in financial sector policies where coking coal, which accounts for approximately 14% of global coal production, is often excluded from coal phase-out restrictions. Despite the steel sector contributing 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 11% of CO2 emissions, financial institutions continue to fund coking coal projects due to the outdated belief that no alternative technologies exist. The document notes that since 2016, banks have provided over 557 billion USD to companies involved in coking coal projects. It calls for an immediate end to financial services for new coking coal projects and the adoption of strict policies requiring companies to provide detailed closure schedules and just transition plans.

The document details the reactions of eleven major European banks to a report on fossil fuel asset exposure. It provides specific 2019 data on fossil assets and equity for each bank, calculating a risk ratio. While some banks like BNP Paribas, Société Générale, and BPCE provided detailed rebuttals or highlighted their transition policies and green financing, others, such as Deutsche Bank and Santander, declined to respond. The banks generally contest the report's methodology, arguing that it ignores portfolio selectivity, client transition strategies, and the broader solvency of banking groups.

The document outlines the environmental and economic dangers of expanding liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure. It highlights that the LNG process is energy-intensive and prone to methane leaks, with US-sourced LNG potentially having a carbon footprint 28% higher than coal. Financially, the report warns of severe overcapacity in Europe, where import capacity may reach 400 billion m3 by 2030 despite a projected demand of only 150-190 billion m3, leading to a high risk of stranded assets in countries such as France, Germany, and Italy. It concludes that conversion to hydrogen or biomethane is largely technically and economically unfeasible, urging financial actors to cease all support for gas expansion.

The document outlines the high energy consumption and methane leakage associated with the LNG value chain, highlighting that US-produced LNG can have a carbon footprint 28% higher than coal. It warns of significant financial risks, including the potential for LNG infrastructure to become stranded assets due to overcapacity, particularly in Europe where utilization rates are forecast to drop to 36% by 2030.

The document advocates for a four-step life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) process—establishing a baseline, defining energy efficiency measures (EEMs), calculating financial metrics, and bundling measures—to avoid the sub-optimal design choices often resulting from simple payback analysis. It demonstrates through a fictional chiller replacement example and a real-world 20,000 square-foot retail store retrofit that LCCA can reveal positive net present value (NPV) and higher internal rates of return (IRR) by accounting for avoided business-as-usual costs and synergistic effects. The authors conclude that while LCCA requires more effort in data collection and modeling, the potential for significant energy cost savings and carbon emission reductions makes it worth the investment.

The report identifies significant energy gaps in Nigeria's healthcare system, noting that 40% of primary healthcare centres (PHCs) lack electricity. It proposes a phased roadmap to electrify 10,000 functional PHCs by 2030, estimating a total cost of $525 million for CAPEX and OPEX over 15 years. The document analyzes three delivery models—traditional equipment ownership, service-based, and a proposed hybrid model—recommending the hybrid approach for Type 2 PHCs to balance private sector efficiency with public sector constraints. Key recommendations include the creation of a centralized dynamic database for health facility energy status and the use of blended financing to mitigate risks for private energy service companies.

The report assesses the energy access gap in Sierra Leone's healthcare system, finding that approximately 38% of facilities lack electricity and many others suffer from unreliable power. It identifies a market opportunity to provide reliable energy solutions to 1,134 primary healthcare units (PHUs), estimating a total investment need of $64 million ($53m CapEx and $11m OpEx). The document proposes a three-phase roadmap from 2023 to 2029, moving from structuring and feasibility to large-scale deployment, while recommending a shift from traditional donor-led equipment ownership to hybrid and service-based delivery models to ensure long-term operation and maintenance (O&M).

The report finds that while electricity financing in 20 high-potential countries rose by 56% to $30.2 billion annually between 2013-2014 and 2015-2016, this remains far below the $52 billion needed for universal access by 2030. Financing is heavily skewed toward non-residential consumers and grid-connected technologies, with a concerning increase in fossil fuel investments, particularly coal. Sub-Saharan Africa faces a widening investment gap, receiving only 17% of total electricity funding. Meanwhile, clean cooking financing declined by 5% to $30 million, a fraction of the $4.4 billion required annually.

The world faces a 'triple crisis' of cost of living, energy security, and food security, which disproportionately affects developing countries and is exacerbated by rising energy prices. While the energy transition offers a path to address these issues, renewable energy deployment in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs) is lagging behind the Global North and China/India. This disparity is driven by a lack of access to capital and prohibitively high interest rates, which increase the cost of technology. For example, the cost of solar PV in Pakistan is 57% higher than in the United States due to capital costs. To unlock renewables, the document proposes systemic financial solutions focused on identifying investment pipelines, developing innovative financing mechanisms to crowd in private capital, and improving climate risk pricing and local currency investing.

The report identifies three primary delivery models for health facility electrification (HFE) in Nigeria: traditional equipment ownership, service-based, and a proposed hybrid model. It maps these models against four types of health facilities based on their electricity access and ability to pay. Traditional models are suited for low-capacity Type 1 clinics, service-based models for privately owned Type 3 general hospitals, and hybrid models for Type 2 primary health centres and Type 4 teaching hospitals. The document emphasizes the need for a Programme Management Unit (PMU) in the hybrid approach to manage funds and reduce risks for private Energy Service Companies (ESCOs).

The report finds that Nigeria's health sector is severely underfunded, with the health budget averaging 5% of the national budget, far below the 15% Abuja declaration. Consequently, over 75% of health spending is borne by households through out-of-pocket expenses. Primary healthcare facilities (PHCs) often rely on user fees to cover operational costs, including electricity from the grid and fuel generators, which cost an average of ₦23,500 to ₦48,000 per month. To achieve the NPHCDA target of 10,000 electrified PHCs, the report estimates a total requirement of $525 million, split between short-term needs ($180 million for 3,433 facilities) and medium-term needs ($345 million for 6,567 facilities). The document recommends a blended financing approach combining government funds like the Basic Healthcare Provision Fund (BHCPF), donor grants, and private sector debt and equity to mitigate risks for energy service companies.

The report assesses Kenya's cooling landscape, highlighting that 9.6 million people are at high risk due to lack of cooling access. It identifies critical needs in agriculture, where 40% of food is lost annually, and healthcare, where electricity gaps hinder vaccine cold chains. To mitigate these issues and align with the Energy Transition and Investment Plan (ETIP) 2023-2050, the document recommends eight policy interventions, including the adoption of passive cooling, stricter Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPs), and the phase-out of HFC refrigerants. It also proposes financial strategies such as green bonds and blended finance to overcome high upfront costs for sustainable cooling technologies.

The report identifies a significant energy access gap in Sierra Leone's schools, with 86% of primary schools lacking electricity. It proposes a three-phase roadmap (2023–2029) to electrify over 9,500 schools using solar PV systems, estimating a total investment need of $90 million for secondary schools alone. The analysis emphasizes the need for a shift from donor-led equipment ownership to sustainable service-based or hybrid delivery models to ensure long-term operation and maintenance (O&M).

The report investigates the ambiguity surrounding the terms 'climate finance' and 'fair share,' concluding that there is no objective way to calculate a country's fair contribution. It finds that Sweden's reported climate finance is largely integrated into its Official Development Assistance (ODA), meaning it provides very little that is 'new and additional' by international standards. The document suggests Sweden could lead by improving reporting transparency and defining its own ambitious fair share target.

The document highlights the difficulty of tracking climate finance in Latin America due to fragmented funding channels and inconsistent definitions of key terms. It presents data from the Climate Finance Group for Latin America and the Caribbean (GFLAC) showing that international public climate finance for eight countries between 2010 and 2015 primarily consists of loans and is skewed toward mitigation over adaptation. The authors call for mutually agreed definitions, clear reporting guidelines, and capacity building within national governments to improve the collection and use of climate finance data for decision-making.

Between 2010 and 2014, Palau received US$6.2 million in grant-equivalent finance specifically targeting climate change, with 55% allocated to adaptation and 45% to mitigation. An additional US$28.2 million in Official Development Assistance (ODA) provided co-benefits for climate objectives. The primary sources of this finance were the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Australia, and Japan, focusing on environmental policy, research, and biodiversity.

The Association for Science Education (ASE) has no listed investments in arms or fossil fuels but maintains corporate links through sponsored educational projects and partnerships. Specifically, 15% of sponsors for its largest programme, School Science, are fossil fuel companies, and 17% of sponsors for the Optoelectronics College are military industrial organisations. The ASE lacks a formal environmental or ethical investment policy.