Search Climate Insights Directory

Reclaim Finance argues that Société Générale's coal exit strategy is inadequate because it allows continued support for companies planning new coal projects and uses a revenue-based threshold for restricting services that lacks a precise definition of a 'credible exit strategy'.

The document critiques the European Commission's (DG MARE) use of a 99% sustainability figure for fish landings, arguing it masks ongoing overfishing by excluding shared stocks and those without specific scientific advice. It contends that focusing on landing volumes rather than the number of individual stocks ignores depleted species and fails to meet the legal requirements of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The author recommends shifting reporting to stock numbers and including all harvested stocks to ensure transparency and ecosystem-based management.

The Clean Air Task Force criticizes a proposed EPA rule that would change how the costs and benefits of Clean Air Act regulations are measured, claiming the move lacks statutory authority and is designed to limit environmental protections. The statement highlights that public health benefits typically outweigh compliance costs, citing an EPA study where benefits of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments exceeded costs by over 30 to 1. The author characterizes this proposal as part of a broader deregulatory agenda under the Trump administration that ignores science and economic principles.

The Life After Coal Campaign argues that the Draft Regulations Amending the Electricity Regulations on New Generation Capacity, 2011 are redundant and legally inconsistent. They contend that the Electricity Regulation Act (ERA) does not require Ministerial approval for municipalities to establish electricity capacity, and that such regulations create unnecessary barriers to the urgent transition to clean energy. The document highlights the severe health, environmental, and economic harms of South Africa's coal-dependent energy sector and criticizes the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2019 for unjustifiably constraining renewable energy while permitting new coal and gas capacity. The campaign recommends that if the regulations proceed, they must include requirements for environmental and health impact assessments, transparent public consultation, and financial support for under-resourced municipalities.

The document criticizes the May 30, 2020, opening of the Datteln 4 coal power plant in Germany, alleging that Uniper and its parent company Fortum received significant financial support from BNP Paribas and the European Central Bank (ECB). It claims BNP Paribas provided USD 215 million to Uniper and USD 2.9 billion to Fortum between 2017 and 2019, and that the ECB continues to support Fortum through quantitative easing without considering climate impact.

The NGO Forum on ADB calls for the Asian Development Bank to align its energy policy with the 1.5°C goal, divest from coal, and provide unconditional debt relief to developing member countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. The letter also demands the 'No Dilution' of the 2009 Safeguards Policy Statement and the introduction of binding labor and social protections.

The report analyzes the ECB's corporate asset purchase programs (CSPP and PEPP), finding that they provide significant financial support to companies active in coal, oil, and gas. It criticizes the ECB's lack of transparency regarding asset values and argues that the principle of 'market neutrality' creates an anti-climate bias by favoring carbon-intensive sectors. The author recommends that the ECB exclude fossil fuel companies without phase-out plans and align its monetary policy with the 1.5°C trajectory of the Paris Agreement.

The statement critiques a survey by the Basel Committee's High-level Task Force on Climate-related Financial Risks (TFCR), noting that while 23 financial jurisdictions recognize climate change as a financial risk, most are only in the 'building knowledge' phase. It calls for the immediate exclusion of fossil fuel assets from refinancing operations and quantitative easing to mitigate systemic risks and stranded assets.

The statement highlights that nearly 600,000 clean energy jobs were lost by April 2020, with projections suggesting 850,000 workers would file for unemployment by June 30. It criticizes a $3 trillion House recovery package for offering no support to the wind and solar industries while providing cash assistance to biofuel producers.

The document analyzes two primary compensation mechanisms for LEAG's lignite-fired units in Lusatia: Direct Closure Payments and a New Security Reserve. It argues that the EUR 1.75 billion in Direct Closure Payments lack a meaningful incentive effect because the plants would close on a similar or earlier schedule under business-as-usual scenarios, resulting in minimal CO2 reductions. Furthermore, it contends that the New Security Reserve is unlawful as it fails to meet the design and transparency requirements of the EU's 2019 Electricity Market Regulation and creates a perverse incentive for operators to increase generation prior to mothballing to maximize remuneration.

A coalition of 92 organisations argues that BlackRock's role in developing ESG criteria for EU banking rules is compromised by its massive investments in fossil fuels and its history of lobbying against such regulations.

The document argues that BlackRock Investment Management (UK) is unfit to advise the European Commission on environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks in banking because of its financial stakes in fossil fuels and its history of lobbying against the EU taxonomy. The signatories claim that BlackRock's role as a major shareholder in European and global banks, as well as its holdings in coal, oil, and gas, create a conflict of interest that undermines the European Green Deal. The letter requests the cancellation of the contract, public disclosure of future reports, and a revision of the Commission's consultation procedures to reduce the influence of the fossil fuel industry.

The document details how logging activities in the Făgăraș, Maramureș, and Domogled Natura 2000 sites in Romania are causing severe biodiversity loss, including the disappearance of priority species and the destruction of old-growth forests through clear-cuts and progressive logging.

Reclaim Finance has filed two information requests with the European Central Bank (ECB) demanding the disclosure of individual asset values and climate-related data for its corporate sector purchase programs. The organization argues that the current lack of transparency prevents stakeholders from understanding the environmental impact of monetary policy and hinders the democratic process during the ECB's strategic review and its response to the Covid-19 crisis.

The European Central Bank (ECB) is criticized for failing to disclose sufficient information to evaluate the climate impact of its asset purchase programs, including the Corporate Sector Purchase Program (CSPP) and the Pandemic Emergency Purchase Program (PEPP). Reclaim Finance has filed two information requests seeking the separate value of each bond held and specific data on assets linked to fossil fuels and the Global Coal Exit List, arguing that this transparency is essential for the ECB's strategic review of its monetary policy strategy.

The Clean Air Task Force condemns the EPA's decision to reverse the finding that regulating mercury and air toxics from coal-fired power plants is 'appropriate' under the Clean Air Act. The organization argues that the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) have been highly effective since 2012, reducing air toxics by 96 percent and avoiding 11,000 premature deaths annually. CATF warns that this reversal could lead utilities to disable existing emission controls, wasting ratepayer funds and increasing public health risks during the COVID-19 pandemic. The statement further claims the EPA's rule is biased, relying on outdated data and ignoring the health benefits of controlling most of the 80+ air toxics emitted by power plants.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) criticizes the EPA's proposal on National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter, stating it ignores scientific evidence that current standards are inadequate. CATF highlights that EPA career staff recommended a lower annual average standard of 8 µg/m³, yet political decision-makers maintained the 2012 standard of 12 µg/m³. The statement also condemns the EPA for rushing the proposal, reducing public comment opportunities, and disbanding an expert panel intended to assist the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC).

The Centre for Environmental Rights, acting for groundWork and Earthlife Africa NPC, has formally requested written reasons from the South African Minister of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries regarding an amendment to the Minimum Emission Standards (MES). The amendment, published on 27 March 2020, doubles the permissible sulphur dioxide (SO2) limit for existing solid-fuel combustion installations, which the authors argue is unconstitutional and unlawful.

A coalition of organizations criticizes the French government's failure to strictly condition state aid on the non-payment of dividends, arguing that companies benefiting from public funds, such as partial unemployment schemes, should not privatize profits while socializing losses. The authors demand a mandatory suspension of dividends and bonuses to prioritize employee remuneration and investment in a more resilient, ecological economic model.

The briefing critiques the European Commission's draft proposal to modernise the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), asserting that it fails to adequately protect the EU's regulatory autonomy or shield climate policies from investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) challenges. It argues that the proposal maintains an outdated focus on investment protection and lacks binding sustainability mechanisms, a requirement to exhaust local remedies, and a specific carve-out for climate response measures. The author concludes that without fundamental shifts—such as differentiating between low-carbon and carbon-intensive investments and establishing a supremacy clause for environmental obligations—the ECT will continue to create a 'chilling effect' on essential environmental and social regulations.