Search Climate Insights Directory

The South African mining sector is highly vulnerable to job losses driven by biophysical climate impacts and international trade responses, with coal, gold, and platinum being the most at risk. While biophysical impacts could lead to 14,700 job losses across all sectors, international trade responses could cause between 9,400 and 52,800 losses by 2030. The report highlights that coal and lignite mining is particularly vulnerable, with expected job losses of approximately 6% by 2030. However, the transition to a low-carbon economy creates opportunities for job growth in the extraction of minerals required for clean energy technologies, such as manganese and platinum group metals. To manage this transition, the report recommends a two-pronged approach to inventory and match transferable skills to non-mining sectors and new mining sub-sectors.

A coalition of environmental organizations calls on Finland to advocate for stricter EU climate targets, specifically requesting a 95% emission reduction by 2050 and a 47% reduction in the effort-sharing sector by 2030. The letter argues against 'loopholes' in forestry and emissions trading and demands a LULUCF regulation that uses historical baselines for forest carbon accounting and includes mandatory wetland protections.

The document examines the tension between international trade rules and national climate policies, arguing that while trade rules are often seen as barriers to climate ambition, they can also facilitate the deployment of clean technologies. It proposes five key steps to create a more climate-friendly trade regime: an authoritative interpretation of GATT Article XX, the inclusion of climate expertise in WTO dispute settlement, the use of regional trade agreements to test climate rules, the pursuit of plurilateral deals like the Environmental Goods Agreement, and increased institutional coordination between the WTO and UNFCCC to enhance transparency.

The report proposes 'Inclusion of Consumption' (IoC) as a way to ensure carbon prices are reflected in the cost of materials like steel and cement, which are currently shielded by free allowance allocations in emissions trading schemes. By adding a charge to the consumption of these materials based on benchmarks, the IoC aims to incentivize material efficiency and innovation without harming competitiveness. The authors argue that IoC is administratively feasible, compliant with WTO law, and qualifies as an environmental regulation under EU law.

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that Illinois can cost-effectively meet its Clean Power Plan (CPP) target—reducing carbon emissions by 34 percent below 2012 levels by 2030—by adopting a "Clean Path Case." This approach involves strengthening the state's renewable portfolio standard (RPS) and energy efficiency portfolio standard (EEPS) alongside a mass-based emissions trading program. The analysis suggests this pathway would yield nearly 6,000 MW of new wind and solar capacity, reduce typical household electricity costs by 9.4 percent by 2030, and generate $14.3 billion in cumulative health and economic benefits through 2030 by reducing CO2, SO2, and NOx pollution.

The Union of Concerned Scientists proposes a "Clean Path Case" for Pennsylvania to meet its Clean Power Plan target of reducing emissions by 29 million tons (24% below 2012 levels) by 2030. This pathway combines a mass-based carbon emissions trading program with strengthened renewable energy and energy efficiency policies. The analysis indicates that this approach would yield over 10,700 MW of new wind and solar capacity, generate $804 million in average annual revenue from carbon allowance auctions, and provide $4.5 billion in cumulative health and economic benefits through 2030. Long-term, the plan is projected to reduce typical residential electricity bills by 3.4% by 2030 compared to a reference case with no new policies.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) submitted a public statement to the EPA supporting the Clean Power Plan (CPP) while advocating for a mass-based emissions trading approach for states subject to a federal implementation plan. UCS argues that a mass-based system provides greater certainty for achieving emissions budgets and better integration with future carbon markets. The document provides detailed recommendations for both rate-based and mass-based models, including the expansion of eligible zero-emission resources to include distributed generation and energy efficiency. It also proposes modifications to the Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) to broaden project eligibility timelines and ensure benefits reach low-income communities. Additionally, UCS emphasizes the need to protect voluntary renewable energy markets and suggests implementing interim compliance provisions to prevent emissions deficits.

The document warns that the Paris climate treaty risks failure if it allows 'hot air' (non-real emission reductions) to be used for compliance. Drawing on failures of the Kyoto Protocol's CDM and JI mechanisms, and the oversupply of permits in the EU ETS, the author advocates for the cancellation of surplus permits, the creation of a robust international accounting system to prevent double counting, the end of carbon offsetting in favor of direct finance for developing countries, and the exclusion of non-permanent land use offsets from carbon markets.

The Coal Atlas 2015 examines the systemic damage caused by coal extraction and combustion, highlighting its role as a primary driver of global CO2 emissions and its associated health and human rights violations. It analyzes the economic instability of the 'carbon bubble' and the failure of technologies like carbon capture and storage, while documenting the rise of renewable energy and grassroots protests against the coal industry across various nations, including China, India, the US, Russia, and Germany.

Carbon Market Watch argues that carbon markets should not substitute for domestic emission reductions and warns that oversupply in previous systems, such as the EU ETS and Kyoto Protocol's International Emissions Trading, has undermined their effectiveness. The organization emphasizes that the remaining carbon budget to stay below 2ºC is limited, necessitating a focus on zero/low carbon infrastructure over offsetting. It recommends that any new framework for international unit transfers must include robust eligibility rules, environmental integrity standards, and accounting rules to prevent double claiming.

Carbon Market Watch argues that while carbon markets can be useful for high-cost emission reduction sectors, they must not substitute for domestic action or lead to the lock-in of high-carbon infrastructure. The organization emphasizes the necessity of an all-encompassing international accounting framework to prevent double counting and calls for the integration of social and environmental safeguards, including a grievance mechanism for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

Carbon Market Watch argues that international carbon markets must be supplementary to domestic action and governed by strict eligibility, accounting, and integrity rules to avoid the failures of previous mechanisms like the CDM and EU ETS. The organization recommends excluding REDD-plus and agriculture from carbon markets, implementing a 'negative list' of ineligible project types, and establishing a UN-led standard-setting body to prevent double-counting and ensure net atmospheric benefits.

The document argues that the EU's 2030 target of reducing non-ETS emissions by 30% relative to 2005 levels will create a significant gap between the demand for and supply of Annual Emissions Allocations (AEAs). It suggests that the existing 2020 flexibility mechanism is insufficient and proposes the creation of an AEA Clearinghouse to facilitate project-based trading, increase market transparency, and catalyze low-carbon investment in lower-income Member States.

Carbon Market Watch asserts that international carbon markets require high ambition and demand to function effectively. Drawing on the Kyoto Protocol experience where weak targets in Russia and Ukraine created 'hot air' credits that undermined emissions trading, the author advocates for eligibility criteria based on stringent targets and the principle of supplementarity, where market units only supplement domestic ambition.

The research evaluates policy options to reach a 450 PPM CO2 concentration target by 2050, focusing on the period up to 2035. Using the GDynE model, the authors compare domestic carbon taxes and international emission trading (IET) against scenarios where the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is used for welfare redistribution, energy efficiency, or renewable energy. The findings indicate that while abatement costs are generally detrimental to the growth of developing countries, a GCF financed by an 8% levy on developed countries' carbon tax revenues can mitigate these losses. Specifically, investing GCF resources into energy efficiency in developing countries provides the most significant global benefit, potentially resulting in a net gain for developing economies and reducing the overall cost of meeting climate targets for all parties.

The paper argues that single-year targets create uncertainty regarding emissions pathways and may reduce cumulative mitigation outcomes compared to multi-year targets, especially when tradable units are used. It assesses four accounting options to address these issues and recommends that future international agreements require continuous multi-year targets to ensure comparability and alignment with carbon budgets.

The briefing outlines a strategic policy framework for California to maintain its climate leadership and reach its 2050 emissions targets. It emphasizes the need for a 2030 carbon cap to provide investment certainty and recommends specific reforms: transitioning utilities to performance-based regulation, implementing energy labels for existing buildings, enhancing the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and establishing 'gold standard' methane emissions regulations. The authors also advocate for regional cooperation with other U.S. states and technical collaboration with China to scale clean energy technologies globally.

The document outlines SEI's research on climate finance and carbon markets, arguing that adaptation finance priorities are political rather than scientific, and that private sector finance is unlikely to meet the primary needs of the poor and vulnerable. It also evaluates the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), suggesting that excluding problematic project types, such as coal power, would improve carbon market efficiency.

The document is an open letter addressed to ministers and delegates of UNFCCC signatory states, urging them to adopt ambitious climate protection measures and stop the use of emissions trading to weaken climate commitments. The signatories, representing 33 countries, demand the rejection of a pilot phase for emissions unit trading under the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA), the prevention of double counting, and the exclusion of non-additional projects and coal from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). They also call for the cessation of fossil fuel subsidies and the implementation of human rights safeguards in climate projects.

This briefing describes how fiscal policy instruments—such as taxes, subsidies, and market mechanisms—can incentivize sustainable actions and discourage unsustainable practices. It highlights Germany's revenue-neutral motor vehicle tax based on CO2 emissions and discusses the applicability of similar province-specific fiscal mechanisms within the Canadian context, specifically for Manitoba.