Search Climate Insights Directory

Reclaim Finance is calling on ArcelorMittal shareholders to escalate engagement at the 2025 AGM by voting against management-proposed resolutions. The organization argues that the company is backtracking on climate goals, delaying direct reduced iron (DRI) projects, and allocating insufficient capital to decarbonization, with only US$0.3-0.4 billion of planned 2025 capital expenditures dedicated to such projects.

Civil society organisations have called on the Agence des participations de l'Etat (APE), the primary shareholder of ENGIE, to force the company to stop expanding its gas infrastructure. The signatories argue that ENGIE's current climate strategy is incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit and highlight risks associated with long-term LNG import contracts and new gas plant projects. They specifically demand a public commitment to exit gas for electricity production by 2035 in Europe and OECD countries, and by 2040 globally, while halting new gas infrastructure and long-term LNG contracts.

Reclaim Finance contends that ENGIE's strategy of signing long-term LNG import contracts facilitates the construction of new export terminals and the exploitation of new gas fields, specifically in the US Permian Basin. The document highlights that these contracts, some extending beyond 2040, contradict IEA Net Zero scenarios and European decarbonization goals, potentially creating stranded assets or shifting carbon risks to Asia. It specifically cites the Port Arthur LNG and Rio Grande LNG projects as examples of high-emission infrastructure supported by ENGIE, and calls for shareholders to vote against CEO Catherine MacGregor and the company's "Say on Climate" proposal.

The document analyzes the 'responsible' employee savings fund offerings of major French account holders, finding that these funds often include investments in companies developing new fossil fuel projects incompatible with a 1.5°C warming limit. It highlights a gap between marketing claims and actual investment practices, specifically citing Crédit Agricole and Société Générale.

Wells Fargo has withdrawn from the Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) and subsequently dropped its 2030 sectoral financed emission targets and its 2050 net zero goal. While other major North American, Japanese, and Australian banks have also left the NZBA, most have stated they remain committed to their climate goals. Reclaim Finance argues that banks must continue to address financed emissions regardless of their membership in the NZBA.

Reclaim Finance criticizes ArcelorMittal for contradictions between its public decarbonization claims and its actual financial and operational actions. The organization highlights delayed hydrogen-based steel projects in Europe, insufficient capital expenditure for decarbonization, and misleading emissions reporting. It calls on investors to pressure the company to publish an updated Climate Action Report (CAR3) with a clear timeline to phase out coal globally.

Reclaim Finance argues that ArcelorMittal is failing to implement sincere decarbonization actions despite its public commitments. The organization calls on investors to demand a solid climate strategy, specifically requesting the long-awaited third climate action report (CAR3) to include a commitment and timeline for exiting coal across all global operations.

An analysis by Reclaim Finance reveals that in 2020, Crédit Agricole, BNP Paribas, BPCE, Société Générale, and the Fédération bancaire française (FBF) unanimously supported the CSRD. These institutions advocated for mandatory common standards, climate transition plans aligned with European goals, and the extraterritorial application of reporting rules to ensure comparability. They also supported lowering the reporting threshold to companies with 250 employees to facilitate green financing. The report contrasts these past positions with current industry efforts to simplify or weaken the regulation.

The report examines Arla's climate strategies, finding that its net-zero commitments fail to meet most UN recommendations and that its focus on technological solutions like biogas does not address its primary methane emissions. It further alleges that Arla engages in lobbying to derail EU climate legislation and uses misleading marketing campaigns to present its products as carbon neutral.

The report argues that Arla Foods employs 'smokescreens' to hide its significant methane footprint and derail climate legislation. It highlights a gap between Arla's net-zero pledges and its actual practices, noting that the company prioritizes intensity-based targets for Scope 3 emissions rather than absolute reductions. The document details Arla's reliance on biogas as a 'silver bullet' solution, which the authors claim incentivizes industrialization and larger herd sizes over sustainable grazing. Furthermore, it documents Arla's direct and indirect lobbying in the EU to exclude agriculture from the Methane Strategy and block plant-based alternatives in school programs. The report also examines legal challenges in Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands regarding Arla's 'carbon neutral' marketing claims, which courts found to be misleading.

The report exposes how Brazil's powerful agribusiness sector uses political capture and greenwashing to avoid climate accountability, specifically by omitting agricultural methane from the country's Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) and lobbying to weaken environmental protections ahead of COP30.

The report argues that Brazil's agribusiness sector, dominated by giants like JBS, MBRF, and Minerva, exerts systemic control over political and public narratives to avoid climate regulation. It highlights a critical 'blind spot' in Brazil's updated NDC, which omits agricultural methane emissions despite the sector accounting for 75.6% of the country's total methane. The document details how the 'ruralist caucus' (FPA) controls Congress and pushes for controversial methane metrics like GWP* to downplay warming impacts. It also exposes the 'AgriZone' and other industry-led events surrounding COP30 as tools for greenwashing, while noting that structural weaknesses in the Climate Plan, Tax Reform, and Forest Code continue to favour industrial agriculture over sustainable agroecological farming.

Reclaim Finance calls on European financial institutions to phase out financing for metallurgical coal, noting that while some banks have project-level restrictions, many others have no commitments at all. The document highlights that the steel sector can become coal-free by the early 2040s and warns that continuing to fund metallurgical coal is a risky investment given the industry's transition toward cleaner alternatives.

Global Energy Monitor (GEM) identifies that five major oil and gas plant owners failed to disclose 10.7 million tonnes of CO2 emissions in 2022, resulting in an annual social cost of $2 billion. The report highlights how companies use the 'operational control' and 'financial control' approaches of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol to exclude assets from their reporting boundaries. Specifically, the Saudi Electricity Company failed to disclose over 7 million tonnes of CO2 from three plants, representing $1.3 billion in annual climate costs. Other analyzed entities, including Egyptian Electricity Holding Company, Calpine Corporation, Chubu Electric Power Co. Inc., and Entergy Corporation, also exhibited gaps between their reported emissions and their actual asset ownership.

The document highlights the significant influence of French banks on the automotive market, noting that five major groups control 34% of leasing contracts. It criticizes these banks for lacking a phase-out date for internal combustion engine rentals and for a low proportion of electric vehicles in their fleets compared to market averages, particularly at BNP Paribas and Société Générale.

The briefing examines the climate impact of 22 global meat and dairy corporations, finding that their combined emissions are comparable to those of entire countries or major oil companies. It argues that the industry uses 'green smokescreens'—such as weak net-zero targets, unproven techno-fixes, and regenerative agriculture—to distract from the need to reduce livestock production. The document further highlights a lack of mandatory agricultural methane targets in the 11 countries where these companies are headquartered, attributing this to 'agricultural exceptionalism' and industry political influence.

The report examines 22 of the world's largest meat and dairy companies, finding that their combined emissions are comparable to those of major oil companies and entire nations. It argues that corporate net-zero targets are largely non-aligned with the 1.5°C warming limit and that the industry relies on 'techno-fixes'—such as feed additives and biogas—and 'regenerative agriculture' to distract from the need to reduce livestock production. The analysis further highlights a lack of mandatory agricultural methane targets in the 11 countries where these companies are headquartered, attributing this to 'agricultural exceptionalism' and industry political influence.

The report alleges that Blackstone, the largest landlord in the U.S., has exploited housing shortages to maximize returns. It highlights significant rent increases in San Diego, a shift toward increased evictions after 2022, and the use of investor capital to fight rent control initiatives in California. Additionally, the document examines Blackstone's use of RealPage's YieldStar software amid allegations of industry-wide price-fixing.

The report identifies a strategy of 'agricultural exceptionalism' employed by the meat and dairy industry to avoid environmental regulation. It details three primary tactics: distracting the public via greenwashing and targeting youth on social media; delaying action by promoting voluntary technical solutions over systemic dietary changes; and derailing legislation through extensive political lobbying and funding in the US and EU. The document highlights the industry's use of specific scientific narratives, such as the GWP* metric and 'regenerative agriculture', to minimize the perceived impact of methane emissions.

The report exposes how 'Big Ag' employs a playbook of distraction, delay, and obstruction—similar to tactics used by the tobacco and oil industries—to prevent the regulation of agricultural emissions and the transition to plant-based diets. Through the analysis of 22 major companies, the authors find that these corporations use greenwashing, industry-funded science to downplay methane's impact, and aggressive lobbying to maintain a 'carrot without a stick' policy environment where changes remain voluntary and subsidized.