Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch claims the European Commission is routinely ignoring or bypassing required impact assessments and public consultations for major climate policies. The author asserts that this shift toward 'vibe-based' policymaking, driven by deregulation and industry lobbying, undermines transparency and risks significant economic and environmental damage, citing specific examples such as the 2040 climate target and the EU ETS2 Market Stability Reserve.

The NewClimate Institute provides a critique of the second draft of the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard v2.0, noting improvements in scope 3 emission source identification and reporting granularity while highlighting concerns regarding the 1% threshold for emission responsibility, the use of non-durable removals for fossil emissions, and the frequency of standard renewals.

The #HandsoffNature coalition, comprising BirdLife Europe & Central Asia, ClientEarth, the European Environmental Bureau, and WWF, warns that the European Commission is dismantling core environmental protections under the guise of reducing administrative burdens. The coalition highlights the economic and human costs of climate-induced disasters, noting that droughts, floods, and heatwaves caused €43 billion in damages in a single summer, with projected losses reaching €126 billion by 2029. They specifically criticize the proposed revisions to the Water Framework Directive and the draft Omnibus Regulation on Food and Feed, asserting that these moves favor mining and agrifood lobbies over public health and ecological stability. Furthermore, the coalition points to findings by the EU Ombudswoman that the Commission bypassed democratic processes and transparency in previous regulatory actions.

The People's Summit declaration argues that the capitalist mode of production and transnational corporations are the root causes of the climate crisis and environmental racism. It rejects market-based 'false solutions' and the current multilateral system, calling instead for the recognition of ancestral knowledge, the protection of indigenous territories, and a sovereign, popular energy transition. The document demands the end of fossil fuel extraction, the redistribution of wealth from the global north to the south as socio-environmental debt, and the implementation of agroecology and feminist care work as central to planetary survival.

Carbon Market Watch concludes that Verra's VM0052 methodology for coal-to-clean carbon credits is inadequate and should not be used to issue credits in its current form. The report identifies critical risks of carbon leakage, over-estimation of emission reductions due to static baseline assumptions, and potential double counting. It also finds that the 'just transition' requirements are too vague and susceptible to manipulation, particularly regarding benefit-sharing and worker compensation. Using the South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation (SLTEC) project in the Philippines as a case study, the report illustrates how independent power producers could build new coal plants to replace retired capacity, nullifying climate benefits. The author urges Verra to suspend the methodology and implement substantive revisions.

The statement argues that the Canada-Alberta MOU represents a 'climb down' in climate leadership by pushing the 75% methane reduction target to 2035, contradicting a previous 2030 promise. The authors claim this delay threatens thousands of jobs in the methane mitigation industry, ignores more stringent standards adopted by the EU, US states, and other G7 allies, and results in significant economic waste from leaked natural gas.

Reclaim Finance criticizes AXA for insuring the Calcasieu Pass LNG terminal in Louisiana, arguing that this contradicts AXA's stated commitments to reduce support for shale gas. The document highlights the terminal's significant local pollution, its role in global methane emissions, and the contradiction in AXA's policy of refusing to insure shale gas production while insuring the export terminals that process it.

Friends of the Earth conducted lab tests on Target's Good & Gather baby food in August 2025, finding 29 different pesticides across apple and pear purées. The analysis identified 16 highly hazardous pesticides, including carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, and neurotoxins, as well as five PFAS 'forever chemicals'. The report highlights that while levels were below U.S. EPA limits, these standards are outdated and fail to account for the vulnerability of developing infants. It further links the use of these pesticides to biodiversity loss, specifically harming pollinators and soil health, and advocates for a transition to organic farming to reduce toxic exposure and mitigate climate change.

The West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) has significantly increased its spending on outside contractors, with $14 million paid to three private equity-owned firms in 2024-2025, which the report argues undermines the stability and quality of support for students with disabilities.

Earthjustice is challenging a decision by Chair Dawn N.S. Chang of the Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM) to allow the use of potable groundwater for irrigating the Kapalua Bay and Plantation Golf Courses. Earthjustice argues that this action was unilateral, unlawful, and violates the State Water Code, as the golf courses are not listed as existing groundwater users in the relevant permit applications. The document highlights that this water use continues despite a severe drought in West Maui and strict water restrictions for community members. Earthjustice cites a memorandum from CWRM Deputy Director Ciara W.K. Kahahane stating that groundwater should not be used for golf course irrigation and that such use was not occurring at the time of the area's designation as a Water Management Area in August 2022.

The IEJ argues that South Africa's 2025 MTBPS prioritises debt stabilisation over growth and social welfare, leading to 'indiscriminate and harmful cuts to spending' in health and education. The document criticises the reduction of the inflation target to 3%, the continued austerity in non-interest spending, and the reliance on private sector 'de-risking' and privatisation. It further highlights the precarious future of the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant and the failure to address structural unemployment through activist fiscal policies.

A coalition of health and environmental organizations urges the Canadian Minister of Health to retract a proposal to eliminate cyclical pesticide re-evaluations, arguing it would undermine the post-market risk assessment framework and contradict existing regulatory policies.

Plan 1.5 argues that the South Korean government's 2035 NDC, set at 53-61% below 2018 levels, is inadequate because the 'practical' lower bound of 53% is driven by industrial interests rather than scientific necessity. The organization highlights that the industrial sector's reduction target of 24.3% is significantly lower than those of comparable manufacturing nations like Japan and Germany. The statement calls on the National Assembly to revise long-term reduction paths to protect future generations and avoid potential legal liabilities under international law.

Plan 1.5 criticizes the South Korean government's proposed 2035 NDC targets of 50-60% and 53-60% reductions compared to 2018 levels, labeling them unconstitutional. The organization argues these targets lack scientific basis, ignore the country's fair share of global emissions reductions (estimated at 65%), and unfairly shift the burden of climate action to future generations by prioritizing short-term industrial interests.

The UBIC opposes government proposals to link the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant to employment, arguing that such conditions are ineffective in a context of structural unemployment and serve as a tactic to reduce social spending. The statement calls for the grant, which is due to expire in March 2026, to be extended and transformed into an unconditional, expansive basic income to address poverty.

Carbon Market Watch warns that carbon markets are being promoted as a 'cure-all' for the climate crisis, which risks camouflaging climate inaction. The organization asserts that these markets are riddled with systemic flaws, often violate human rights, and cannot replace the scale of climate finance required for developing countries. It calls for COP30 to prioritize rapid, substantial emissions cuts over the use of carbon credits for offsetting.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Agirc-Arrco, ERAFP, and the Fonds de Réserve pour les Retraites (FRR) for employing BlackRock, an asset manager it claims actively supports fossil fuel expansion. The organization highlights BlackRock's $431 billion in holdings in companies developing new fossil projects as of May 2024 and its declining support for environmental shareholder resolutions. Reclaim Finance urges these French institutions to adopt science-based climate criteria for selecting managers and to publicly oppose BlackRock's practices, noting that other European pension funds, such as the Dutch PFZW, have already withdrawn mandates from the firm.

ClientEarth warns that further delays to the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), currently set to apply to the private sector on 30 December 2025, would cause significant environmental damage and create legal vulnerabilities. The document asserts that such delays lack proper impact assessments and conflict with EU environmental protection principles, the principle of legitimate expectations for businesses that have already invested in compliance, and international law regarding State climate obligations as clarified by a 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion.

Plan 1.5 argues that the South Korean government's current 2035 NDC consultation process is biased toward industrial interests and excludes marginalized groups. The organization highlights that approximately 95% of online public submissions demand a 65% reduction target aligned with the 1.5°C goal, while criticizing the 50% range as unconstitutional and insufficient.

A coalition of NGOs denounces TotalEnergies' plan to restart the $20 billion Mozambique LNG project, citing a 'deep contempt' for local communities and the environment. The organizations highlight that the project's resumption is contingent on the Mozambican government approving a revised budget that includes $4.5 billion in additional costs incurred during the force majeure period. The statement further alleges severe human rights abuses, including the 'container massacre' and torture of civilians, and calls on financial institutions—including Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and various export credit agencies—to withdraw their support.