Search Climate Insights Directory

The Sahel region is experiencing a major geopolitical shift as Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso have formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) and severed ties with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). This move reflects deep-seated anti-French and anti-EU sentiment, driven by perceptions of neo-colonialism and a focus on security and migration over socio-economic development. As the EU's influence wanes, Russia has expanded its presence through military cooperation and strategic economic interests, including potential control over Niger's uranium. The author argues that the EU and ECOWAS must move away from punitive sanctions and colonial-era approaches toward equal partnerships and dialogue to maintain stability and influence in the region.

The voluntary carbon market (VCM) operates through a complex system of carbon credits, derivatives, and intermediaries. While intended to fund emissions reductions, the market is characterized by a lack of financial transparency and a tendency to prioritize cheap credits over impactful ones. Credits can be traded multiple times on a secondary market, where financial gains accrue to intermediaries rather than project developers. Trading occurs via spot markets for immediate delivery or through futures, forwards, and options for future settlement. Debt instruments, such as bonds, also provide upfront project financing. Data from 2023 indicates that industrial projects typically attract larger retirement volumes compared to projects with co-benefits like clean cookstoves.

The report provides a 'Bank of Evidence' detailing the failures and risks of geoengineering, categorized into carbon removal and solar radiation management. It highlights specific project failures in carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Australia, the UAE, and Canada, and critiques the ecological risks of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air capture (DAC). The document also examines speculative solar radiation management (SRM) experiments in the US, UK, and Mexico, and various marine geoengineering attempts, asserting that these 'false solutions' often benefit the fossil fuel industry while threatening biodiversity and human rights.

The report documents the negative impacts and risks associated with various geoengineering 'false solutions,' including carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), direct air capture (DAC), solar radiation management (SRM), and marine geoengineering. It provides specific examples of project failures, environmental hazards, and social injustices across Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and Latin America, asserting that these technologies often perpetuate the fossil fuel economy rather than solving the climate crisis.

The document provides a comprehensive critique of geoengineering, categorizing it into carbon removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM). It details specific failures and risks of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS/CCUS), Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), Direct Air Capture (DAC), and marine geoengineering across various global regions, emphasizing that these 'false solutions' often facilitate continued fossil fuel extraction through Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) and pose significant ecological and social threats.

The Green Connection (TGC) and Natural Justice (NJ) have filed for judicial review in the Western Cape High Court to overturn the environmental authorisation granted to Total Energies EP South Africa Block 567 (Pty) Ltd for offshore drilling. The challenge is based on six grounds, including failures to assess socio-economic impacts on small-scale fishers, climate change impacts from gas burning, and transboundary risks to Namibia. Following Total's July 2024 announcement of its withdrawal from block 567, the company filed a joinder application to include Shell as a party in the case, which TGC and NJ oppose on the grounds that the exploration right has lapsed and the challenge concerns the authorisation granted to Total, not the exploration right itself.

A coalition of civil society organizations is urging the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to publicly release and transparently implement its new Remediation and Responsible Exit Framework. The statement argues that the IFC must recognize its international legal responsibility to repair damages caused by its projects and avoid the lack of disclosure that characterized previous pilot programs for Responsible Exit Principles.

The author argues that the US House Appropriations Subcommittee's Fiscal Year 25 budget proposal for the Department of the Interior is a 'political theater' that endangers natural resources and public health through budget cuts and 'poison pill' policy riders.

The document is a formal statement by a coalition of NGOs and academics criticizing the FAO's 'Pathways towards Lower Emissions' report for underestimating the climate mitigation potential of dietary shifts. The authors argue that the report contains systemic biases and methodological failures, such as double-counting emissions and using obsolete dietary guidelines. They call for a retraction of the report, a delay of the upcoming 2050 Roadmap report until these issues are addressed, and greater transparency regarding the GLEAM livestock emissions methodology.

The NZBA's steel sector guidance is criticized for failing to mandate strict target methodologies, omitting capital markets activities, and ignoring coal mine methane emissions. The authors argue that banks must adopt policies to end financing for blast furnace expansion and metallurgical coal mining to align with a 1.5°C pathway.

The Maputo Floating Thermoelectric Power Plant Project, a partnership between Karpower and Electricidade de Moçambique (EDM), proposes a 415MW natural gas-powered floating station in the Espírito Santo Estuary. The project includes a 4km transmission line and a 3km gas pipeline. Potential risks include the degradation of mangrove ecosystems, loss of livelihoods for artisanal fishers in Matola, Katembe, and Maputo city, and increased respiratory diseases due to reduced air quality. The document highlights the risk of 'locking-in' to costly fossil fuel agreements that could crowd out renewable energy alternatives. It also notes Karpower's controversial track record in South Africa, Guinea-Bissau, and Brazil, including allegations of environmental racism and human rights violations.

The US Treasury is criticized for not opposing World Bank Group financing of fossil fuel projects, including recent International Finance Corporation commitments to oil and gas in Nigeria and Mali, and a feasibility study for a Liquid Natural Gas terminal in Morocco.

A coalition of environmental organizations, including Greenpeace and Reclaim Finance, responded to the French Senate's inquiry into TotalEnergies. While they welcome the report's critical assessment of TotalEnergies' "climaticide" strategy and its expansion of fossil fuels, they argue that the 33 recommendations lack the binding measures necessary to align the company with the Paris Agreement. The associations specifically criticize the absence of super-profit taxation and the perceived weakness of the French state in regulating the multinational.

The document criticizes the financing of the Stade LNG terminal in Germany, arguing that such projects create an unnecessary dependence on fossil gas and contradict climate goals. It highlights a disconnect between banks' public climate commitments and their continued funding of LNG import and export infrastructure.

Between 2021 and 2023, commercial banks from G7 countries provided $101 billion to the coal industry, with US and Japanese banks leading the funding. The report highlights that this financing far exceeds the G7-led funding promised for Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) in developing nations. It criticizes the G7's goal of phasing out coal by the first half of the 2030s as insufficient to meet the 1.5°C warming limit and calls for strict capital requirements and bans on coal developers.

Reclaim Finance highlights the contradiction between the values promoted by French banks through sports sponsorships and their continued financial support for fossil fuel expansion. The report details the funding provided by BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and BPCE to oil and gas companies and liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects between 2021 and 2024, asserting that such investments are incompatible with the Paris Agreement and IPCC guidelines.

The report argues that Indonesia's biomass co-firing program primarily benefits large conglomerates and politically connected elites rather than promoting a just energy transition. It highlights how companies affiliated with groups like Sinarmas, Korindo, and Medco dominate energy plantation forest (HTE) concessions, often through opaque ownership structures or 'shadow companies'. The document details instances of deforestation, land conflicts with indigenous peoples (notably in Papua and NTB), and the persistence of 'carbon debts' resulting from the conversion of natural forests to HTE. Furthermore, it notes that some biomass suppliers are also coal traders, and that the actual biomass used in PLTUs often consists of unregulated sawdust rather than the planned wood pellets, undermining the program's environmental claims.

Reclaim Finance claims that ArcelorMittal uses the low-carbon recycled steel of the Paris 2024 Olympic flame to mask a global strategy that continues to build coal-fired blast furnaces. The organization highlights that four major French banks—BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Société Générale, and BPCE—provided nearly 13 billion US$ to the company between 2016 and June 2023, urging them to adopt stricter sectoral policies to end financing for new coal-based steel projects and the companies that develop them.

The petition argues that the Upstream Petroleum Resources Development Bill (B13B – 2021) violates the South African Constitution and the One Environmental System (OES). It highlights the Bill's failure to provide adequate local economic development frameworks, its acceleration of fossil fuel extraction during a climate emergency, and its insufficient public participation and consultation processes. The petitioners urge the President to refer the Bill back to Parliament for redrafting to align with human rights and climate science.

Carbon Market Watch urges the UN Article 6.4 Supervisory Body to reject current drafts of the appeal and grievance processes and the sustainable development tool, arguing they contain insufficient human rights safeguards and create barriers to redress for affected communities.