Search Climate Insights Directory

The document identifies a strategic shift from outright climate denial to 'strategic doubt,' where influential economic and political actors—including fossil fuel companies and right-wing populist movements—deliberately spread misleading information to obstruct climate action. It highlights that policymakers are primary targets of these campaigns, which are disseminated through traditional media, social media, and non-public corporate channels. The report notes a significant research gap in the Global South and proposes four policy interventions: mandatory standardized carbon reporting, litigation against greenwashing, the creation of cross-sectoral voluntary alliances, and the enhancement of scientific and media literacy for the public and officials.

The document outlines four core principles for the EPA to implement cumulative impact assessments: decreasing disproportionate burdens through distributive and restorative justice, expanding beyond traditional risk assessments to include social determinants of health, accounting for historical burdens, and adopting a precautionary approach that shifts the burden of proof to regulated actors.

The document argues that the EPA's definition of cumulative impacts must be actionable, culturally competent, and explicitly inclusive of social determinants of health. It recommends that the EPA workshop and improve the Office of Research and Development's current definition through engagement with frontline communities to ensure it reflects lived experiences and supports health equity.

The document outlines a framework for cumulative impact assessments (CIAs) that integrates equity, justice, and public health practices. It argues that the EPA and other government entities should use transparent principles to ensure assessments inform regulatory decisions, such as permit denials or pollution cleanup, while incorporating diverse stressors and community-led trust building.

The document advocates for the integration of lived experience, experiential knowledge, and community knowledge into environmental regulatory systems to better understand cumulative impacts in overburdened communities. It defines these terms to ensure consistent regulatory use and argues that such knowledge is an essential complement to professional scientific data, which often has blind spots. The text recommends that the EPA institutionalize training for employees in active listening and implicit bias, and adopt mixed-methods approaches to integrate qualitative community data with quantitative analysis.

The document advocates for the EPA to adopt management-zone strategies and community-driven approaches to address cumulative environmental burdens. It emphasizes integrating regulatory tools with pollution reduction, ensuring accountability through Community Benefits Agreements, and preventing resident displacement. The summary highlights the need for interagency coordination and meaningful community leadership in the design and execution of environmental health protections.

The document argues that environmental pollution disproportionately affects low-income communities and communities of color due to systemic drivers like racism and colonialism. It recommends that the EPA move beyond 'race-neutral' assessments by using direct indices of social adversity—such as segregation and material hardship—rather than simple proxies. Additionally, it calls for the application of an antiracist lens in government science, the recruitment of staff from overburdened communities, and the removal of barriers to laws that repair past environmental injustices.

The document outlines recommendations for the EPA to integrate climate justice into environmental protections. It emphasizes the need for transparent, holistic decision-making, the acknowledgment of historic biased policies, and the strengthening of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) to better account for cumulative stressors and the specific needs of marginalized communities and non-mainland US territories.

The Council on Strategic Risks proposes that the next US administration create a task force with a 9-month deadline to recommend a structure for a centralized "Know Your Customer" (KYC) entity for nucleic acid synthesis screening. While the 2024 White House "Framework for Nucleic Acid Synthesis Screening" requires screening for federally funded programs, the author argues that a centralized approach is needed to address gaps in private industry and non-federally funded research. The proposal suggests the task force determine if the entity should be a government office, public-private partnership, or private entity, and recommends formally designating the FBI as the lead agency for investigating suspicious orders via its WMD coordinators.

The report warns that 'relining' seven aging coal-based blast furnaces in the US Great Lakes region is a multi-billion dollar risk that locks in high emissions and health-harming pollution for another 20 years. While these plants represent only about a quarter of US steel production, they generate approximately 75 percent of the industry's emissions. The authors argue that instead of spending $150M to $425M per furnace on relines, companies should invest in hydrogen-ready Direct Reduction (DRI) coupled with electric arc furnaces (H2-DRI-EAF), which can achieve near-zero carbon emissions. Although a new DRI plant costs more ($600M to $800M) and faces a near-term energy cost gap of approximately $2.50/kg H2 compared to coal, the transition is projected to protect skilled union jobs and create additional employment in renewable energy and hydrogen production. The report concludes that federal and state support—via tax credits, grants, and infrastructure investment—is necessary to close the remaining economic gap and avoid stranded assets.

More than 40 civil society organizations and 20 experts have called on the European Central Bank (ECB) to update its climate and nature approach. The signatories argue that current monetary policy, including high interest rates and the phasing out of asset purchases, has hampered green investment. They demand a new Climate Roadmap for the 2025 monetary policy strategy assessment, specifically recommending the update of the collateral framework, the tilting of securities in asset portfolios, and the introduction of green lending facilities to align the ECB's mandate with the EU's green transition goals.

The author contends that households and businesses can act as a 'flexible power plant' by adjusting electricity use during peak demand, reducing the need for natural gas backup. The text highlights an Ontario program where smart thermostats created a 90 MW 'virtual power plant' and urges federal and provincial governments to incentivize energy efficiency and smart device integration to lower costs and carbon emissions.

A joint call from over 130 signatories requesting an EU Action Plan for Plant-Based Foods by 2026 to improve health, environmental resilience, and strategic autonomy in protein production.

The author contends that customer-driven demand-side management—such as smart thermostats, heat pumps, and optimized EV charging—can serve as a 'virtual power plant' to maintain grid stability. The text highlights a successful Ontario program that created a 90-megawatt virtual power plant and calls for federal and provincial policy shifts to prioritize energy efficiency investments over fossil fuel infrastructure.

The briefing highlights that iron production accounts for over 80% of steel supply chain emissions and argues that a common 'near-zero emissions' iron definition is necessary to guide investment and trade. It proposes a threshold of 350 kgCO2e/t iron to exclude coal-based production and suggests that hydrogen-based direct reduction (DRI) is the primary commercial pathway to achieve this. To overcome supply chain complexities, the document advocates for direct procurement and 'book and claim' systems, announcing that RMI will design and test a climate-credible book and claim system for iron and steel in 2025.

The IISD response to the DESNZ consultation argues that updated EIA guidance for fossil fuel projects should require the separate reporting of Scope 3, Category 11 emissions and the use of zero-emission baselines for new projects. It further recommends that the significance of emissions be assessed against science-based 1.5°C scenarios and the specific need for the project.

The policy brief argues that climate change threatens US national security by damaging critical infrastructure, increasing state fragility, and intensifying geopolitical competition. It recommends that the US government implement a National Adaptation Plan, integrate 'Operational Resilience' into military budgets, scale up resilience funding for strategic allies, and strengthen interagency coordination on the food-climate-security nexus to protect US interests and economic competitiveness.

A group of organizations, including the Union of Concerned Scientists, has sent a letter to U.S. Senators requesting that they reject nominees for federal leadership positions who lack necessary academic or professional credentials, possess disqualifying conflicts of interest, or disregard scientific consensus. The letter emphasizes that scientific integrity—defined as adherence to professional practices and objectivity free from political interference—is essential for managing threats such as pandemics and cyberattacks. The authors provide specific criteria for voting against nominees and suggest a set of four commitment-based questions for Senators to use during confirmation hearings to ensure appointees will use the best available scientific evidence to inform public policy.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) argues that the EU's Clean Industrial Deal must adopt a technology-neutral approach, integrating a diverse portfolio of low-carbon solutions including carbon capture, hydrogen, and small modular reactors. The brief emphasizes the need for coordinated cross-border infrastructure, particularly for CO2 transport and storage to avoid regional cost disparities, and calls for a robust funding strategy to bridge a projected €180 billion gap following the end of the Recovery and Resilience Facility in 2026. It further recommends targeted market measures, such as reforming public procurement and prioritizing clean hydrogen for hard-to-abate sectors like steel and shipping, while warning against the use of public funds for inefficient solutions like hydrogen blending.

The document advocates for separating carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from general climate goals to avoid 'mitigation deterrence,' where the hope of future CDR technologies slows current emission reductions. It proposes a three-pronged approach: binding targets for gross emission reductions, biosequestration in natural sinks, and permanent technological removal. While the EU currently uses 'net' targets for 2030 and 2050, the author suggests the upcoming 2040 target proposal is an ideal opportunity to formalize this separation.