Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of environmental and labor organizations calls on the Canadian government to maintain or strengthen draft methane regulations for the oil and gas sector to meet 2025 reduction targets and Paris Agreement commitments, warning against industry and provincial pressure to weaken these rules.

The Clean Air Task Force argues that New Jersey's nuclear plants, specifically Hope Creek and Salem, are critical for maintaining the state's zero-carbon electricity share. The testimony asserts that replacing these plants with wind and solar would require an impractical scale of immediate buildout, and replacing them with gas would increase regional emissions by approximately 11 million tons annually, undermining goals like those of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). The author supports a proposed subsidy of approximately $10/MWH to keep these plants operational as a low-cost interim measure.

The We Mean Business coalition is calling for private sector companies to sign the Powering Past Coal Alliance declaration, joining over 25 countries, states, and regions in accelerating the phase-out of traditional coal power. The coalition emphasizes that coal plants produce nearly 40% of global electricity and are a primary driver of climate change and negative health effects. The document advocates for a 'just transition' to clean energy to help limit global temperature increases to well below 2°C, and preferably 1.5°C, urging companies to sign the declaration before the One Planet Summit on December 12, 2017.

Civil society organisations, including Greenpeace Africa and the Life After Coal Campaign, have requested a meeting with South Africa's Minister of Energy to address the integrity of the Integrated Energy Plan (IEP) and Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). The signatories argue that the current process has "substantial flaws" and advocate for a just transition from coal to publicly-owned renewable energy and energy efficiency. They propose eleven principles for the IRP, emphasizing least-cost technology combinations, the inclusion of external costs to health and climate, and alignment with the Paris Agreement and South Africa's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). The letter specifically seeks clarity on timelines, public participation, the status of energy determinations for coal, nuclear, gas, and renewables, and the delay in Independent Power Producer agreements.

The We Mean Business coalition calls for stronger alignment between government policies and corporate climate action to meet Paris Agreement goals. The coalition highlights significant corporate commitments to emissions reductions and advocates for the Marrakech Partnership and the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue to be used as platforms for enhancing NDCs and building climate resilience.

A coalition of NGOs calls on the European Parliament, Council, and European Commission to ensure the post-2020 EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) supports the Paris Agreement. The statement argues that the ETS must stop subsidizing coal plants and instead tighten the carbon cap to drive decarbonization and a socially just transition, noting that unabated coal in Europe must reach zero by 2030 to meet climate targets.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment advocates for a National Active Transportation Strategy to reduce healthcare costs and climate impacts, citing a Toronto pilot project where a bike lane increased cycling by 49% and reduced vehicle/cyclist conflicts by 61%.

The report details various cases in Latin America where transnational corporations in mining, energy, agribusiness, and tobacco have violated human rights and caused environmental destruction. It highlights the 'architecture of impunity' created by bilateral investment treaties and the ICSID arbitration system, which allow companies to sue states over public interest policies. The document advocates for a binding international treaty and an independent international tribunal to ensure corporate accountability and the supremacy of human rights over commercial interests.

The report details cases of corporate abuse in Latin America, including mining disasters in Brazil, the assassination of environmental defenders in Mexico and Honduras, and legal battles over public health and water in Uruguay and Argentina. It argues that current international investment frameworks, such as the ICSID, protect corporate profits over human rights and national sovereignty. The authors call for a binding UN treaty to end corporate impunity and the establishment of an international tribunal to hold transnational companies accountable for environmental and social crimes.

The Environmental Advisory Council calls for Latvia to advocate for higher 2030 EU emission reduction targets, a more accurate baseline for non-ETS sectors starting in 2017, and the reduction of compensation mechanisms to ensure the effectiveness of the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD).

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) is calling for a meeting with the Department of Environmental Affairs to address evidence of widespread non-compliance by Eskom power stations with their atmospheric emission licences (AELs). Based on a report by Professor Eugene Cairncross analyzing data from 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016, the CER identifies multiple stations likely exceeding PM10, NOx, and SO2 limits. The CER argues that Eskom is the largest emitter in the Highveld Priority Area and recommends stricter reporting requirements, including the use of daily average concentrations rather than monthly aggregates, to accurately monitor compliance.

The document highlights Peru's vulnerability to climate events, citing the severe impacts of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the high economic risks of climate change. It advocates for the implementation of the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) to build resilience in priority sectors including water, agriculture, fisheries, forests, and health.

Five environmental and health organizations are urging the Canadian Minister of Health to set a completion deadline of April 2018 for the PMRA's second special review of atrazine. The groups argue that the initial review was too narrow in scope and delayed, noting that atrazine has been banned in the European Union since 2004 due to groundwater contamination. They emphasize that continued delays prolong risks to human health and the environment, including endocrine disruption in aquatic animals and exposure through drinking water.

The EU is developing post-2020 LULUCF accounting rules that will likely influence global standards. The author warns that the EU's carbon sink is projected to decline by nearly 100MT by 2030, largely due to increased harvesting for bioenergy. The letter emphasizes that failing to accurately count these sink reductions, while simultaneously granting bioenergy a 'zero emissions' rating, would result in emissions being omitted from accounting entirely.

A coalition of medical experts and environmental advocates calls on Greater Manchester mayoral candidates to prioritize public health by meeting legal air pollution limits by 2020. The letter highlights the severe health impacts of air pollution in the region, noting that legal limits are exceeded in every local authority from Wigan to Stockport. The authors propose the implementation of Clean Air Zones and increased investment in public transport, walking, and cycling, while calling for a new national Clean Air Act to establish the right to breathe clean air in UK law.

A coalition of NGOs argues that the expansion of Vienna airport is incompatible with Austria's climate goals and the Paris Agreement. They highlight that aviation is the most carbon-intensive transport mode, benefiting from tax exemptions and an ineffective carbon offsetting scheme (CORSIA), and call for the end of airport expansions and fuel tax exemptions to meet emission reduction targets.

A joint letter from NGOs to the UK Secretary of State for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, arguing that supporting the revised LCP BREF is essential for public health and environmental protection. The authors highlight that the new standards would significantly reduce premature deaths and health costs in Europe, while complementing the UK's domestic coal phase-out goals.

ClientEarth expresses concern over the incremental delays in publishing the Emissions Reduction Plan | Clean Growth Plan, noting that the government's timeframe shifted from December 2016 to "as early on in 2017 as possible". The organization argues that Sections 12 and 14 of the Climate Change Act require the plan to be published "as soon as is reasonably practicable" following the setting of the fifth carbon budget. ClientEarth highlights that institutional investors require a "detailed policy framework" to mobilize capital for the Paris Agreement targets and calls for a formal consultation process similar to the one used for the 2011 Carbon Plan. The letter demands a revised publication date and an explanation for any further delays.

The document is an open letter from ClientEarth and several environmental NGOs to the First Vice-President of the European Commission. It highlights a March 17, 2017, finding by the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC) that the EU failed to provide adequate access to justice for individuals and NGOs in environmental matters, specifically breaching Article 9(3)(4) of the Aarhus Convention. The authors argue that while Member States and businesses can defend their interests, no individual or NGO has been granted legal standing before the Court of Justice of the EU to challenge institutional decisions on environmental issues, except for document disclosure refusals. To remedy this, the letter proposes that the European Commission amend Regulation 1367/2006 and that the European Court of Justice revise its interpretation of standing criteria under Article 263 TFEU to ensure environmental NGOs are considered to have "direct and individual concern" regarding acts impacting the environment.

The document is a joint statement from multiple NGOs calling on the European Parliament to oppose the reintroduction of subsidies for the construction of new fishing vessels, citing the EU's existing ban since 2004 and the goals of the Common Fisheries Policy and UN Sustainable Development Goal 14.