Search Climate Insights Directory

The document asserts that climate change is a systemic financial risk that threatens the global economy and the living conditions of beneficiaries, thereby making climate action an integral part of an asset owner's fiduciary duty. It advocates for a 'systemic approach' that prioritizes long-term stability over short-term gains, urging asset owners to halt capital allocation to fossil fuel expansion, engage aggressively with portfolio companies, influence asset managers, and advocate for ambitious public policies. The report highlights that current risk models often underestimate the potential for catastrophic economic losses, which could reach 50% of global GDP by the end of the century.

The report finds that Equinor's historical and planned production significantly exceed science-based carbon budgets. Since 1972, Equinor's assets have caused 8.66 GtCO2 in emissions, with the majority originating from Norway. The analysis argues that Equinor's current global portfolio and future expansion plans are incompatible with a 1.5°C pathway, overshooting the IEA NZE benchmark by 0.93 GtCO2 between 2024 and 2050. It further critiques Equinor's 'Bridges' scenario for relying on outdated carbon budget data and unproven carbon removal technologies.

The document is a legal communication submitted by ten Australian citizens alleging that the Australian government's fossil fuel export policies violate their rights to life, privacy, family, home, and culture. It argues that Australia's role as a leading exporter of coal and liquefied natural gas (LNG) materially contributes to the climate emergency, causing specific harms to the authors, including extreme heat, bushfires, flooding, and toxic algal blooms. The authors contend that Australia has failed its due diligence obligations under international law and that domestic legal remedies are inadequate, requesting the Committee to declare these actions incompatible with human rights obligations and recommend a phase-out of fossil fuel exports.

The Tassiriki Call, adopted in April 2026, outlines a vision for a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific based on 100% renewable energy and the 1.5°C temperature limit. It advocates for a global Fossil Fuel Treaty, scaled-up grant-based finance, and the creation of an Inter-Governmental Taskforce for a Just Transition to a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific. The statement emphasizes the need for a managed decline of fossil fuel production and warns against the use of carbon capture and geoengineering to justify continued production.

The document outlines three distinct 'tracks' for a just transition from fossil fuels. The UNFCCC and Paris Agreement provide a universal framework for emissions reduction but lack explicit obligations on fossil fuel production due to their consensus-based structure. The COP30 Presidency Roadmap, led by Brazil, serves as a non-binding, non-negotiated forum to facilitate political dialogue and identify barriers to transition. The proposed Fossil Fuel Treaty seeks to fill the governance gap by establishing binding, supply-side commitments through a coalition of high-ambition states, focusing on ending new project expansion, implementing a science-based phase-out, and providing just transition finance.

The report analyzes the limitations of the UNFCCC's consensus-based model and the non-binding nature of Brazil's COP30 Roadmap, arguing for a binding Fossil Fuel Treaty to regulate supply and ensure a just transition.

The Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative is calling for countries to participate in discussions to design a binding legal instrument for a global just transition from coal, oil, and gas. The proposed treaty is based on three pillars: resourcing and cooperation for a just transition, ending new fossil fuel projects, and an equitable phase-out of existing projects aligned with the 1.5°C goal. Joining the bloc creates no immediate legal or financial obligations for participating nations, but allows them to shape the treaty's form, scope, and timeliness. The initiative aims to establish a transition finance support framework to facilitate debt resolution, renewable energy investment, and economic diversification. Participating countries are asked to affirm support, appoint political and technical focal points, work collectively on the treaty mandate, use diplomatic channels to recruit other states, and support the adoption of a negotiating mandate.

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 document translates the ICJ's 2025 Advisory Opinion on climate change into practical legal tools for climate litigation. It details State obligations under international treaties (UNFCCC, Paris Agreement) and customary law, emphasizing a 'rigorous' due diligence standard to limit global warming to 1.5°C. The guide covers specific litigation areas including government framework cases, adaptation, reparations, the right to a healthy environment, corporate conduct, climate finance, speculative interventions (like geoengineering), and regulatory backsliding, providing key quotes and illustrative case examples for each.

The document translates the ICJ's 2025 advisory opinion into practical tools for climate litigation, focusing on government framework cases, adaptation, remedies, the right to a healthy environment, corporate conduct, climate finance, speculative interventions, and regulatory rollbacks. It emphasizes that States have binding obligations to limit warming to 1.5°C, act with 'stringent' due diligence based on the best available science (IPCC), and protect human rights. The notes detail how these findings can be used to challenge inadequate NDCs, hold corporations accountable for emissions, and oppose the dismantling of environmental protections.

The report positions renewable energy expansion as a national security imperative for Japan, which had an energy import dependence of 87.4% in 2024. It argues that the current 7th Strategic Energy Plan is insufficient for the 1.5°C target and proposes a more ambitious pathway to reach 80-90% clean power by 2035-2040. Key recommendations include upscaling grid capacity, fast-tracking permitting, expanding distributed energy, and using long-term offtake agreements to lower capital costs. The document highlights Japan's potential in offshore wind, agrivoltaics, and perovskite solar cells as means to reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels and Chinese crystalline-silicon PV.

Ten years after its 2015 adoption, the Paris Agreement has shifted the projected global warming trajectory from 4.8 degrees C to between 2.3 and 2.9 degrees C, though it remains off track for the 1.5 degrees C goal. While clean technology growth has exceeded expectations—with electric vehicles now comprising a fifth of auto sales and solar and wind electricity generation tripling—current nationally determined contributions (NDCs) would deliver less than 14% of the emissions reductions needed by 2035. The author argues that the next decade requires a total economic transformation, a more aggressive approach to phasing out fossil fuels, and a remodeled multilateral process where COP decisions are not subject to a veto by a few nations. Key priorities include supporting the green transitions of large middle-income countries, which account for 60% of global emissions, and integrating climate commitments into national economic policies.

The COP30 summit in Belém concluded with the "Mutirão global" agreement, which maintained negotiations but postponed key decisions on fossil fuels and adaptation finance. While the summit saw record indigenous participation and significant funding commitments for tropical forests and energy infrastructure, it failed to establish a clear mechanism to limit warming to 1.5°C and lacked a process for reviewing Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The document urges reporters to translate these diplomatic results into human-centric stories focusing on vulnerable communities and territorial rights.

The report identifies a significant pipeline of planned coal capacity in South and Southeast Asia, primarily driven by a small group of parent companies and funded by a concentrated network of Asian and international banks. It argues that existing bank policies are largely superficial, focusing on project-level restrictions while allowing corporate finance to continue flowing to coal developers.

Plan 1.5 argues that the South Korean government's 2035 NDC, set at 53-61% below 2018 levels, is inadequate because the 'practical' lower bound of 53% is driven by industrial interests rather than scientific necessity. The organization highlights that the industrial sector's reduction target of 24.3% is significantly lower than those of comparable manufacturing nations like Japan and Germany. The statement calls on the National Assembly to revise long-term reduction paths to protect future generations and avoid potential legal liabilities under international law.

Reclaim Finance reports that the vast majority of TotalEnergies' top global, European, and French shareholders approved management resolutions at the 2025 annual meeting, including CEO remuneration and director re-election. The analysis highlights a disconnect between these votes and science-based climate recommendations, noting that TotalEnergies remains the 6th largest oil and gas field developer globally as of 2024 and has increased planned oil and gas production. While a few shareholders like Union Investment and Ofi Invest AM voted against specific strategic resolutions, the overall average approval rate for management proposals was 94.8%. Reclaim Finance criticizes shareholders for prioritizing short-term financial returns, such as dividends and share buybacks, over the energy transition.

The IISD response asserts that Equinor's application for the Rosebank field development ignores critical Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) guidance regarding downstream Scope 3 emissions. The document argues that the project is incompatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target, as no new oil and gas fields are needed or permissible in such scenarios. Furthermore, the IISD claims the project offers minimal economic benefit, potentially resulting in a net loss to the UK Treasury and providing negligible contributions to energy security.

Plan 1.5 argues that the South Korean government's current 2035 NDC consultation process is biased toward industrial interests and excludes marginalized groups. The organization highlights that approximately 95% of online public submissions demand a 65% reduction target aligned with the 1.5°C goal, while criticizing the 50% range as unconstitutional and insufficient.

The document argues that French life insurance companies are undermining their own climate goals by delegating investments to asset managers that support fossil fuel expansion. It highlights a gap between the climate ambitions of insurers—some of whom have stopped new bond investments in fossil fuel expansion—and the practices of managers like BlackRock and JP Morgan Asset Management. Reclaim Finance calls for the implementation of science-based selection criteria, clear deadlines for manager compliance, and more public, collective engagement to reduce financial risks associated with climate change.

The briefing argues that proposed 'Omnibus I' amendments to weaken or delete Article 22 of the CS3D—which requires companies to adopt and implement 1.5°C-compatible climate transition plans (CTPs)—would contradict the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) July 2025 Advisory Opinion. The ICJ confirmed that States have a binding legal duty to regulate private sector emissions using 'stringent' due diligence. The authors warn that diluting these requirements would increase the liability risks for EU Member States, heighten the legal exposure of companies to climate litigation, and leave the final Omnibus I Directive vulnerable to legal challenges for failing to meet international and EU climate obligations.