Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of energy and agricultural organizations argues that funding cuts proposed in H.R. 2112 would undermine U.S. domestic energy security and rural development. The letter specifically advocates for the restoration of funding for the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), the Biorefinery Assistance Program, and the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP), asserting that these programs are essential for deploying renewable electricity, advanced biofuels, and energy efficiency in rural areas.

Carbon Market Watch requests that the CDM Executive Board define who can submit methodology revisions and clarifications, arguing that allowing all stakeholders—not just project participants—is essential for the integrity of the Clean Development Mechanism.

The document outlines the 40-year history and strategic framework of Friends of the Earth International (FoEI), a global federation of 76 member groups. It argues that environmental destruction, poverty, and human rights violations are systemic issues rooted in a neoliberal economic model. FoEI's approach focuses on 'mobilizing, resisting, and transforming' through key concepts such as climate justice, ecological debt, and food sovereignty. The report details specific campaigns against extractive industries, GMOs, and deforestation, while highlighting the role of grassroots activism and international solidarity in achieving policy changes and protecting indigenous rights.

The brief, submitted by member organizations of La Mesa Nacional Frente a la Minería Metálica de El Salvador, contends that Pac Rim's claims do not constitute a 'legal dispute' or a 'measure' under the ICSID Convention and CAFTA. It argues that the conflict is a political disagreement over metals mining policy driven by organic community opposition, rather than a legal dispute with the state. The brief further alleges that Pac Rim abused the legal process by strategically reincorporating in the United States to gain CAFTA benefits and seeks to use international arbitration to bypass domestic democratic processes and community resistance.

A coalition of environmental and health organizations is urging U.S. Senators to reject a proposal by Senators Conrad and Enzi to weaken coal ash regulations. The coalition argues that coal ash contains toxic chemicals like arsenic and mercury, posing severe risks to public health and the environment, as evidenced by a 2008 spill in Tennessee. They advocate for the EPA to regulate coal ash as a "special waste" under subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) to phase out wet disposal and establish enforceable national standards, rather than adopting voluntary guidelines under subtitle D.

The document details the severe health risks of diesel particulate matter, including 21,000 annual deaths and increased cancer risks. It advocates for the Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) to clean up the existing fleet of 11 million heavy-duty engines and proposes the Clean Construction Act of 2011 to integrate emission controls into federally funded transportation projects, capping costs at 1% of project totals.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) and 12 other organisations are urging the South African Minister of Mineral Resources to exercise discretion under section 49 of the Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) to create 'no-go areas' for mining based on environmental sensitivity. The CER rejects claims by the Chamber of Mines that existing laws—such as the Protected Areas Act, the Biodiversity Act, and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs)—provide sufficient protection, noting that rights have been granted illegally in protected areas and that the Biodiversity Act often only triggers an EIA without providing further legal protection. The CER asserts that a section 49 declaration is the only way to prevent wasted costs for the state and industry by refusing applications in sensitive areas from the outset, citing the Minister's intention to declare the Chrissiesmeer Biodiversity Site as a precedent.

CDM Watch and partner organizations are calling on EU Environment Ministers to ensure that HFC-23 and adipic acid (N2O AA) offset credits are banned from national registries for non-traded sectors by April 2013. While these credits are banned from the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) as of 30 April 2013, the authors argue that the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) could be exploited to allow their use toward national targets, undermining domestic emissions reductions and the Montreal Protocol.

The Center for International Environmental Law, on behalf of La Mesa, requests amicus curiae status in the Pac Rim v. El Salvador case. They argue that the dispute is a political disagreement over sustainable development and public policy rather than a legal dispute over a specific government measure. The document highlights severe environmental risks associated with the proposed El Dorado mine, including threats to the Rio Lempa basin and local aquifers, and alleges that Pac Rim's activities have contributed to community violence and the murder of environmental defenders. Legally, the amici contend that Pac Rim's last-minute corporate reorganization to gain CAFTA benefits is an abuse of process and that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction under the ICSID Convention and CAFTA.

CDM Watch argues that HFC-23 and N2O abatement projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) create perverse incentives and fail to represent real emission reductions. The organization calls on EU Member States to support a European Commission draft Regulation that bans the use of these credits in the EU ETS from 1 January 2013 and prohibits their banking into Phase 3 to maintain environmental integrity over private investor interests.

The report advocates for Zero Net Deforestation and Forest Degradation (ZNDD) by 2020 to protect biodiversity and mitigate climate change. Using the Living Forests Model developed with IIASA, it analyzes various scenarios, including a 'Do Nothing' baseline and a 'Target' scenario. The findings suggest that while ZNDD is technically possible in the short term, maintaining it beyond 2030 will require unprecedented increases in agricultural productivity and significant shifts in global consumption patterns, particularly regarding animal calories. The document highlights critical trade-offs, such as the risk of shifting environmental pressure to non-forest biomes like grasslands and the potential for increased agricultural pollution due to intensification.

A civil society statement warns that the CBD COP is heading for failure, comparing it to the Copenhagen climate summit, due to Northern governments' refusal to accept legally binding commitments on Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) and financial obligations. The statement calls for an ABS Protocol with strong enforcement to stop biopiracy and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.

The document argues that media outlets have a duty to connect the dots between a warming climate and the devastating weather events of 2010, such as heatwaves in Russia and flooding in Pakistan. It asserts that climate change will increase the frequency of severe weather, decrease crop yields, and worsen air quality, providing a list of scientific and journalistic resources to support this coverage.

In a letter to the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs, Gareth Morgan MP disputes government claims that air quality in St Helena Bay is safe. He argues that fish factories emit toxic hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and sulphur dioxide (SO2), which accumulate due to factory operating patterns and cause severe respiratory and neurological damage. Morgan highlights the vulnerability of children and the lack of government investigation into health impacts, citing international studies to link these emissions to conditions such as Bronchiolitis Obliterans and potential carcinogenic effects. He demands that factories stop using rotten fish, improve cleanliness, and install scrubber systems.

The Centre for Environmental Rights and a coalition of environmental NGOs are urging the South African government to use legislative powers to prohibit mining in areas of critical biodiversity and hydrological value. They offer to provide scientific evidence and a list of sensitive areas to assist a government task team in improving environmental compliance and sustainable development in the mining sector.

The document defines environmental justice as the right to healthy living environments and a fair share of nature's benefits. It argues that the poorest populations are disproportionately affected by environmental damage and climate change, while the wealthiest are most responsible. Friends of the Earth advocates for 'climate justice,' where rich countries lead in carbon cuts and fund adaptation for poorer nations. The text highlights specific case studies of its work, including fighting oil pollution in Nigeria, uranium mining in Australia, and urban planning issues in the UK.

A group of economists argues that California's clean energy policies, specifically AB 32, provide economic benefits through innovation, job creation, and reduced health costs, and that delaying these actions during an economic recession would be more costly than proceeding.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and over 90 other organizations urged US Congressional Representatives to fund the revival of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) for Fiscal Year 2011. This call follows the testing of genetically modified eucalyptus trees in the Southern US, designed to withstand cold weather for use in pulp, paper, and biofuels. The author contends that independent assessment is critical for technologies billed as environmental protections or climate change mitigations, noting that GM trees carry a higher risk of "gene flow" from transgenic to wild-type trees than GM crops.

A coalition of environmental organizations urges the U.S. Senate to reject expanded offshore oil and gas drilling, citing the Deepwater Horizon disaster as evidence of the inherent risks to marine ecosystems and coastal economies. The group argues that offshore reserves are insufficient to achieve energy independence and instead calls for a transition to carbon-free energy technologies and a national renewable electricity standard.

Earthjustice argues that the risks associated with offshore oil drilling are too high to proceed, particularly in the Arctic Ocean's Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. The organization highlights that the Deepwater Horizon disaster demonstrates the inability to contain spills and argues that the Arctic presents unique challenges, such as frigid temperatures and ice-clogged seas, which would make a spill even more devastating and long-lasting.