Search Climate Insights Directory

An analysis of 28 companies in the Netherlands reveals that none are aligned with a 1.5°C pathway, with 75% of climate plans rated as inadequate or highly inadequate and a significant lack of mid-term emissions targets between 2030 and 2050.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor reveals that major companies are increasing their use of carbon removals, often relying on low-quality, non-permanent solutions without sufficient transparency. The report highlights issues of double-counting between corporations and governments and argues that carbon removals are being used as a 'licence to pollute' rather than as a supplement to essential emissions cuts.

The report argues that only durable CDR, which stores carbon for millennia, can effectively neutralise residual fossil fuel emissions, yet private sector uptake remains low and concentrated among a few tech companies. It warns that some firms use CDR to avoid deep emission reductions and notes a lack of transparency regarding the social and environmental impacts of supported projects. The document recommends that governments regulate CDR and that voluntary standards require companies to set separate targets for emission reductions and durable CDR support.

The report finds that while durable CDR (storage >1,000 years) is essential for neutralizing fossil emissions, corporate uptake is low and concentrated among a few companies, notably Microsoft. Many companies instead rely on non-durable CDR, which the authors argue is unsuitable for neutralizing long-cycle emissions. The report highlights risks of double counting between companies and governments and a systemic lack of transparency regarding the environmental and social impacts of CDR projects. It recommends that voluntary initiatives like SBTi require companies to set separate monetary and removal targets based on ability to pay, rather than merging them into net-zero goals.

The report argues that while plant-based proteins can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and land use, global retailers are failing to implement the sales targets, transparent reporting, and price parity necessary to drive a large-scale transition. Using a Methane Action Tracker, the analysis finds that US retailers lag behind European ones, and most retailers lack proportional targets that pair plant-based growth with animal protein reduction.

The report finds that the dairy and coffee sectors are failing to address methane emissions, with 18 out of 20 analyzed companies scoring less than 50% on a comprehensive performance scale. While some companies acknowledge the climate impact of methane, there is a widespread reluctance to reduce dairy production, and most lack specific methane targets or transparent reporting practices.

The report finds that most large dairy and coffee companies lack credible methane targets and transparency, with 18 of 20 companies scoring less than half of the available points in a comprehensive assessment. While some dairy companies show slight progress, coffee house companies performed poorly, and only one company, Danone, possesses both a methane-specific target and a detailed action plan.

The report highlights a significant gap between the public sustainability commitments of major seafood companies and their actual implementation of robust traceability. While some companies like Thai Union and CP Foods have group-level commitments, most lack time-bound targets, detailed implementation plans, or annual progress reporting. The document argues that full-chain, digital, and interoperable traceability—specifically aligned with Global Dialogue on Seafood Traceability (GDST) standards—is essential for managing material risks such as IUU fishing, forced labour, and overfishing, and for complying with emerging regulations in the EU, US, and Japan.

The report highlights that steel and cement are the largest industrial emitters, accounting for over 7% and 6% of global CO2 emissions in 2022. It argues that credible corporate transition plans are essential for unlocking private capital, particularly through sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs). An analysis of 20 companies reveals that while 90% have published transition plans, there is a significant lack of consistency in financing disclosure and a critical gap in concrete 'just transition' objectives. The document emphasizes that emerging markets will lead demand growth and hold the majority of coal-based blast furnace capacity requiring reinvestment by 2030, making international coordination and supportive public procurement policies vital for a credible transition.

The analysis finds that none of the five examined electricity producers have a robust transition plan aligned with a 1.5°C limit, specifically lacking firm commitments to exit fossil gas by 2035. While Iberdrola and Statkraft show better practices and a shift toward sustainable energy, Enel, ENGIE, and EPH continue to develop gas plants and require coal exit plans focused on closures rather than sales to ensure absolute emission reductions.

Reclaim Finance argues that TotalEnergies' climate strategy is insufficient for a 1.5°C target, citing continued fossil fuel expansion and inadequate low-carbon investment. The document details the financial networks supporting the company, critiques the 'laxity' of French asset managers like Amundi, and proposes a comprehensive suite of regulatory and monetary reforms to redirect financial flows away from fossil fuels.

The steel sector accounts for 11% of global CO2 emissions, primarily due to the blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) route which relies on metallurgical coal. While secondary steelmaking via electric arc furnaces (EAF) and green hydrogen-based Direct Reduction of Iron (DRI) offer cleaner alternatives, coal-based capacity continues to grow, with 80 million tons of annual capacity planned for relining. The document highlights that ArcelorMittal has weakened its 2030 emissions intensity reduction target from 25% to 10% and prioritizes shareholder returns over decarbonization. It calls on financial institutions to adopt corporate-level exclusion policies for metallurgical coal and stop financing the relining of blast furnaces.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2023 finds that the majority of climate strategies among 24 assessed multinational companies lack integrity, with 2030 targets falling significantly short of the reductions needed to limit warming to 1.5°C. While all 24 companies pledged net-zero or equivalent goals, only five commit to deep decarbonisation of at least 90%. Most strategies rely on ambiguous commitments and non-credible offsetting plans, with only four companies adopting a climate contribution approach without neutralisation claims.

The document criticizes ENGIE for expanding its fossil gas capacity and lacking a detailed transition strategy aligned with a 1.5°C scenario, despite its efforts to phase out coal.

The Changing Markets Foundation and partner organizations inform the Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) that their estimated methane emissions are 0.9 million tonnes, contributing to a broader trend where major meat and dairy companies fail to disclose supply chain methane emissions. The letter demands that DFA set absolute emissions reduction targets aligned with a 1.5°C limit, establish separate methane targets, reduce animal numbers in supply chains, and align with UN standards for corporate net-zero pledges.

The report finds that the fashion industry remains heavily dependent on synthetic fibres, with 25% of analyzed brands increasing their use over the last five years. It highlights a systemic lack of supply chain transparency, an over-reliance on recycled polyester from PET bottles as a 'false solution', and a failure to set absolute Scope 3 emissions targets. While many brands express support for the EU Textile Strategy's regulatory measures, the report argues there is a significant gap between these public stances and actual corporate action.

The report evaluates transition planning among ASEAN companies in sectors like cement, steel, and chemicals against the Climate Bonds Initiative's 'Five Hallmarks' of a credibly transitioning company. It finds that while net-zero commitments are increasing, most plans are fragmented and lack the robust, costed, and science-based pathways necessary for a 1.5°C alignment. The document provides specific analysis of companies such as Siam Cement Group and PTT, and offers guidance on improving the credibility of sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs) by ensuring they include material emission scopes and absolute targets.

The report reveals that four major German asset managers, collectively managing over 2.3 trillion euros, continue to invest in companies expanding coal, oil, and gas production, holding nearly 13 billion USD in the world's worst polluters as of September 2022 without adequate policies to limit this support.

A study by Öko-Institut for Carbon Market Watch finds that major European airlines rely on low-quality, cheap carbon offsets and lack transparency in reporting, often using misleading claims like 'carbon-neutral flying' to mask a lack of substantive emissions reductions.

An assessment of 29 Dutch companies and financial institutions reveals that none achieved a high or reasonable integrity rating for their climate targets. The 21 'real economy' businesses commit to an average emission reduction of only 19% by 2030, failing to meet the 50% reduction needed for a 1.5°C pathway. None of the assessed companies provided concrete, publicly accessible plans aligned with the Paris Agreement, and all eight financial institutions continue to finance fossil fuel value chains.