Search Climate Insights Directory

The document refutes claims by the Korea Automotive Mobility Industry Association (KAIA) that the South Korean government's 2035 NDC targets for zero-emission vehicles are unrealistic. While KAIA argues that the EU and California are relaxing bans on internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, the text asserts that EU targets remain firm and California's situation is a matter of ongoing legal dispute. It further argues that strong regulations and government support in China and the US (specifically for Tesla) demonstrate that ambitious climate targets foster innovation and competitiveness rather than hindering it.

The document argues that the meat and dairy industry employs misleading narratives—including claims about food security, nutritional necessity, and 'regenerative' farming—to obstruct climate action and maintain high production levels. It contends that these tactics distract from the urgent need to reduce methane emissions and shift toward plant-rich diets to meet Paris Agreement goals.

The document examines the environmental and human rights impacts of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, highlighting their contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss. It details the structural links between the fossil fuel and agrochemical industries, specifically the promotion of 'blue' ammonia and hydrogen using CCS as a means to secure long-term demand for natural gas. The text warns that this industrial model undermines food sovereignty and planetary boundaries, advocating for a transition to regenerative agricultural models.

The document addresses industry resistance to the proposed EU deforestation regulation, specifically the 'Geolocation Requirement' which mandates that operators collect latitude and longitude coordinates for all plots of land where covered products (cattle, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, soy, and wood) were produced. ClientEarth argues that traceability is indispensable for ensuring products are 'deforestation-free' and produced legally. It refutes claims that the regulation mandates specific supply chain models like 'identity preserved' or 'segregated' chains, clarifying that mixed-origin supply chains remain permissible as long as they are traceable. The briefing also contends that geolocation requirements will not necessarily exclude smallholders, noting that many in the cocoa and palm oil sectors already support transparency to improve their market position. Furthermore, it argues that compliance costs are likely to be negligible when implemented at scale and that voluntary certification schemes, while useful tools, cannot serve as automatic evidence of compliance due to documented shortcomings in governance and reliability.

The report exposes the agricultural sector as a major user of intentionally added microplastics through plastic-coated agrochemicals. It argues that these products directly pollute soils and food chains, acting as vectors for toxins while potentially increasing the toxicity of the active ingredients. The document challenges industry claims of 'climate-smart' efficiency and calls for a comprehensive global ban on primary microplastics in agriculture.

The report analyzes the role of hydrogen in the energy transition, contrasting 'green hydrogen' (produced via renewable-powered electrolysis) with the current industry standard of steam methane reformation (SMR) from fossil fuels. It warns that the oil and gas industry uses hydrogen rhetoric to justify continued fossil fuel infrastructure and delay electrification. The authors argue that green hydrogen should be reserved for 'hard-to-electrify' sectors like maritime shipping and high-heat industrial processes, while being rejected for use in passenger vehicles, home appliances, and gas-fired power plants due to energy inefficiency, high costs, and pollution risks.

The report refutes the claim that fossil gas alternatives (FGAs) can decarbonize buildings, asserting that their limited supply and high costs make them an inefficient choice compared to electrification. It highlights that FGAs can only replace a small fraction of gas demand and may exacerbate pollution and health risks. The document further alleges that the gas industry uses FGAs as a rhetorical tool and employs 'front groups' to stall the transition to all-electric buildings to protect its financial interests.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law examines the fossil fuel industry's involvement in the development and promotion of geoengineering technologies, arguing that these strategies are used to justify the continued use of carbon-intensive fuels and avoid systemic change.

The report examines how carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM) are promoted by fossil fuel interests to justify continued oil, gas, and coal production. It argues that these technologies often rely on fossil fuel by-products or enable enhanced oil recovery, creating a 'moral hazard' that distracts from viable renewable energy transitions.

The report argues that the proliferation of certification labels creates consumer confusion and allows companies to greenwash their operations without achieving substantive environmental improvements. In fisheries, the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and Friends of the Sea (FOS) are criticized for certifying overfished areas and lacking transparency. In the palm oil sector, programs like RSPO, ISCC, and ISPO are found to have failed in slowing deforestation or peatland drainage. In textiles, the Higg Index and Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) are highlighted for weaknesses such as reliance on self-assessment and allowing GMO seeds. The authors call for a shift toward mandatory government regulations and a reform of certifications based on transparency, independence, holistic life-cycle approaches, and scientific standards.

The report assesses voluntary sustainability certifications in fisheries, palm oil, and textiles, concluding that many schemes act as 'greenwash' and fail to prevent deforestation, overfishing, or pollution. It argues that the proliferation of labels creates consumer confusion and a 'race to the bottom' in standards. The authors call for the abolition of ineffective schemes and a transition toward science-based, transparent, and holistic regulations that cover the entire product life-cycle.

The report examines voluntary sustainability certifications in the palm oil, fisheries, and textile industries, concluding that these schemes often lack transparency, lower their standards to increase volume, and fail to prevent deforestation or overfishing. It argues that certifications are being used as 'greenwashing' tools by corporations and governments and calls for a shift toward strict, independent, and comprehensive standards that cover the entire product life cycle, while emphasizing that voluntary initiatives cannot replace government regulation.