Search Climate Insights Directory

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 2023 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor evaluates 24 multinational companies, finding that 15 of them have climate strategies of low or very low integrity. Key issues include ambiguous net-zero pledges, insufficient 2030 targets that fall short of 1.5°C pathways, and a heavy reliance on non-permanent biological carbon offsets. While emission disclosure transparency is moderate, the report highlights a critical '2030 blind spot' where corporate commitments do not match the required global reductions of 43-48% by 2030. The authors advocate for a shift from offsetting to a 'climate contribution' approach and call for tighter regulatory oversight to ensure corporate accountability.

The analysis finds that interactions between key SDG targets are generally synergetic at a global level under a 1.5°C warming limit, with climate finance and policy mainstreaming acting as primary accelerators for other goals.

The Climate Bonds Initiative provides a certification scheme for entities to validate their climate credentials and transition plans. Certification is available at two levels: Level 1 for entities already aligned with 1.5°C pathways, and Level 2 for those with transition plans predicting alignment by 2030. To be eligible, at least 90% of an entity's activities must be 'Eligible Activities' based on existing Sector Criteria. Certification is valid for five years, requiring annual verification by an approved verifier, and is restricted to non-financial corporate entities.

The document argues that the 2023 pension reform in France increases uncertainty regarding public pensions, thereby incentivising citizens to use private capitalised savings products. Reclaim Finance warns that the primary beneficiaries of this shift—major asset managers and insurers—lack robust commitments to end the expansion of oil and gas and are slow to exit coal, contradicting the 1.5°C warming limit. The briefing also highlights the risk of increased market share for US-based firms like Blackrock, which it describes as less virtuous regarding climate regulations.

The appendix describes the technical process for estimating the 'government plans and projections' (GPP) pathway using data from 19 major producer countries and deriving climate-consistent pathways from IPCC AR6 mitigation scenarios. It outlines the conversion of physical production data into energy and extraction-based GHG emission units and explains the scenario-filtering process used to exclude pathways with unrealistic reliance on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and carbon capture and storage (CCS). Additionally, it compares the 2023 findings with the 2021 assessment, noting a widening production gap for coal by 2030.

The document argues that current agri-food transition finance is often unambitious and lacks alignment with science-based pathways, particularly regarding scope 3 emissions. It introduces five Transition Principles and five Hallmarks to ensure that corporate transition plans are rooted in action rather than pledges, exclude offsets, and align with a 1.5°C trajectory. The paper also reviews various existing frameworks, such as SBTi FLAG and the EU Platform on Sustainable Finance, to identify how they address broader goals like biodiversity, water use, and just transition.

The global steel sector is not on track to halve CO2 emissions by 2030 or fully decarbonise by 2050. Analysis of the top 60 steel producers shows that while 26 have set targets, only 8 provide detailed implementation plans. Even if all existing targets are met, emission intensity reductions by 2050 (54-63%) would fall far short of the 90-100% reduction required for a 1.5°C trajectory. The report identifies three supply-side priorities: ending new blast furnace investments unless they support deep reductions, commercialising deep reduction technologies, and increasing scrap steel recycling.

The document addresses the need for credible financing to accelerate the global transition from coal to clean energy, specifically focusing on coal transition mechanisms (CTMs). It highlights that while CTMs are essential because 93 percent of coal capacity is shielded from market pressures by regulation or contracts, they face significant reputational risks and constraints from private financial institution policies. To address this, the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI), Climate Policy Initiative (CPI), and RMI have developed guidelines to ensure CTMs deliver positive climate and social outcomes, avoid moral hazard, and support a just transition for workers and communities.

The We Mean Business Coalition expresses disappointment that COP27 failed to include a proposal to phase down all fossil fuels, despite recognizing the 1.5°C limit. While the Coalition welcomes progress on financial support for vulnerable communities, the recognition of a just transition to renewable energy, and the role of business in the 2030 Work Program, it warns that current national commitments are insufficient to drive the necessary emissions reductions by 2030.

The document criticizes ENGIE's coal phase-out strategy, claiming the company avoids genuine decarbonization by selling coal plants to third parties or converting them to fossil gas and solid biomass. It highlights specific asset sales in Europe, Brazil, and Morocco, and conversions in Chile, arguing these actions are not aligned with a 1.5°C trajectory and risk ecological damage.

Reclaim Finance criticizes ENGIE for its 'false' coal exit strategy, which involves selling coal plants to third parties or converting them to biomass and fossil gas. The document highlights specific cases in Germany, the Netherlands, Brazil, Morocco, and Chile, arguing that these actions avoid corporate responsibility for environmental damage and fail to align with a 1.5 °C warming trajectory.

Recourse argues that the MDBs' COP27 Joint Statement is a disappointment because it ignores the 1.5°C warming target and obscures the fact that MDB support for fossil fuels exceeds their financing for renewables. The organization highlights a lack of transparency regarding Paris Agreement alignment methodologies and calls for the MDBs to rule out fossil gas and LNG as transition fuels.

The document advises journalists to avoid cynicism when covering COP27, urging them to humanize and localize stories while holding powerful actors accountable. It emphasizes the critical nature of the 1.5-degree-C target and the central role of 'loss and damage' payments from rich to poor countries as a matter of climate justice.

The toolkit argues that rights-based approaches lead to more effective and legitimate climate outcomes. It outlines a three-step process for integrating rights into NDCs: inclusive planning, transparent communication of how rights informed that planning, and reflecting human rights obligations in implementation and monitoring. The document provides specific recommendations across seven thematic areas: ambition, participatory planning, general human rights integration, gender mainstreaming, Indigenous Peoples' rights, land tenure, and just transition. It emphasizes that states must align their climate ambition with the 1.5°C target to fulfill human rights obligations and should account for all emissions under their jurisdiction, including extraterritorial ones. The toolkit includes guiding questions and illustrative examples from the NDCs of Canada, Mexico, Vanuatu, Nepal, Costa Rica, Bolivia, and Chile to demonstrate best practices in human rights-based climate action.

The document establishes a framework for Coal Transition Mechanisms (CTMs) to ensure they deliver real emissions savings, align with 1.5°C goals, and support a just transition. It outlines eight specific guidelines across four 'stage gates': plant eligibility, transition pathways, social protection, and accountability. The framework is illustrated through a real-world case of ratepayer-backed bond securitization in the United States and hypothetical scenarios involving a sovereign sustainability-linked bond in Indonesia and a managed transition vehicle for an Independent Power Producer (IPP).

The document describes a methodology for evaluating market-based measures (MBMs) and fuel standards in the shipping sector. It establishes a 100-point scoring system based on seven criteria, with the highest weights assigned to alignment with the Paris Agreement's 1.5 °C target and the speed of pollution reduction. The tool provides specific quantitative benchmarks for emissions caps, carbon levies, and GHG intensity limits across five climate scenarios, while also assessing equity, revenue use for vulnerable countries, and enforcement mechanisms.

The document argues that the Paris financial center continues to support oil and gas expansion despite commitments to the 1.5°C goal. It systematically dismantles ten 'received ideas' used by banks, insurers, and asset managers to justify this support, citing IEA and IPCC data to show that no new fossil fuel projects are compatible with net-zero pathways. The briefing highlights that 'transition' claims by oil majors are often unsupported by investment data and that engagement without the threat of exclusion is ineffective.

An analysis of global modelled pathways concludes that new oil and gas fields and new fossil import infrastructure in Europe are incompatible with limiting global warming to 1.5°C.

Reclaim Finance expresses skepticism regarding Climate Finance Day 2022, arguing that major French banks and insurers are failing to align with scientific recommendations to end oil and gas expansion. While 15 investors have adopted exclusion policies, heavyweights like BNP Paribas and AXA are criticized for relying on decarbonization targets or limited exclusions rather than full exits from new fossil fuel projects.