Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that hundreds of American houses of worship face chronic flooding by 2050, with thousands more at risk by 2100 if emissions remain unchecked. It highlights the particular vulnerability of Gulf and Southeast coast states, specifically Louisiana, Florida, and North Carolina, while suggesting that deep emissions cuts and local adaptive measures could significantly reduce these risks. Additionally, it discusses the energy footprint of religious buildings and provides recommendations for improving energy efficiency and adopting renewable energy to mitigate climate change.

The author reflects on the impact of Extinction Rebellion's April 2019 protests in London, noting that while they successfully brought climate change to the mainstream, the movement now faces the challenge of maintaining this momentum. The text advocates for the implementation of a Citizens' Assembly to facilitate public policy discussions, while warning that decarbonisation goals—such as reducing meat consumption and flying—may face public resistance. It further emphasizes the need to increase ethnic and socio-economic diversity within climate activism to move beyond 'middle-class white folks' and ensure a 'just transition' that is socially sustainable.

The report finds that while 70% of registered U.S. voters believe global warming is happening, there is a significant partisan divide in beliefs about its causes and the urgency of action. Despite this, there is broad cross-party support for renewable energy investment, pollution regulation, and carbon taxes. The Green New Deal is supported by a majority (69%) of voters, though opinions on its economic impact and funding are split. Global warming is a high priority for Democrats but ranks low for Republicans as a 2020 voting issue.

The Clean Air Task Force supports the Green New Deal's goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions, emphasizing that deep decarbonization requires a diverse portfolio of technologies, including renewables, nuclear power, and carbon capture and storage.

Friends of the Earth U.S. proposes a Green New Deal centered on a total transition to 100 percent renewable energy and ecological agriculture. The platform advocates for the rapid phase-out of fossil fuels, the elimination of subsidies for carbon-intensive industries, and the rejection of unproven technologies like carbon capture and geoengineering. It emphasizes a 'just transition' based on energy democracy, food sovereignty, and the protection of worker rights and frontline communities, while calling for the United States to address its ecological debt to the Global South.

The 2019 Climate Snapshot reveals that a majority of UK adults view climate change as a critical issue and believe the government is not doing enough to prepare for its impacts. There is significant public support for radical policy shifts, including bringing forward the 2050 net zero deadline, implementing a 'Green New Deal', and holding financial institutions legally accountable for fossil fuel investments. The survey also highlights a preference for solar and offshore wind energy and a desire for faster adoption of low-emission vehicles.

A survey of 966 registered U.S. voters conducted in late 2018 found that 81% support the policy goals of the Green New Deal, including a majority of Republicans (64%). The report suggests this high level of bipartisan support may be due to the fact that 82% of respondents had heard nothing about the Deal prior to the survey and were not told which political party championed the proposal.

The report finds that a majority of US registered voters believe global warming is happening and human-caused, with notable increases in these beliefs among Republicans. There is broad cross-party support for clean energy policies like the Green New Deal and carbon taxes, though voters remain split on fossil fuel expansion. While many express a willingness to take collective action, few have actually contacted elected officials in the past year.

The author contends that Brexit reflects a global anger toward political elites and the failures of globalisation, rather than a failure of the EU itself. The text highlights specific risks for Ireland, including the potential return of a land border and economic destruction if the UK leaves the single market. It further argues that the EU must reform its governance—specifically the European Council—to increase transparency and accountability to prevent further rises of right-wing populism in states like France. The author suggests that a lack of investment in infrastructure and a 'Green New Deal' contributed to the precariousness that fueled the Leave campaign.

The author contends that the rise of right-wing and left-wing populism in Europe is fueled by the failure of national governments to deliver common EU policies for social division, climate collapse, and economic instability. The text advocates for a 'Green New Deal' to steer capital toward ecological modernization, a collaborative taxation policy to end corporate tax dumping, and systemic reforms to increase transparency and reduce the influence of economic lobbies within EU institutions. It specifically calls for the cessation of free trade agreements like TTIP, CETA, and TiSA, arguing they limit European democracy.

The author calls for a shift from technocratic management to bold common European policies to combat the rise of right-wing populism and national sovereignty movements. Key proposals include a 'Green New Deal' to direct excess capital into ecological modernization, a coordinated fight against corporate tax dumping, and the strengthening of civil society and transparency to reduce the influence of corporate lobbies. The author specifically advocates for the rejection of trade agreements like TTIP, CETA, and TiSA, which are viewed as constraints on democratic governance.

The author contends that the crisis of globalized liberalism has erased the differences between traditional productivist parties, leaving ecology as the only force proposing necessary systemic transformations. The text criticizes the French Green party (EELV) for subordinating itself to the Socialist Party (PS), which it claims led to electoral decline and a failure to influence government policy. To recover, the author advocates for a 'Green New Deal' implemented through 'contractual autonomy'—where alliances are based on specific programmatic agreements rather than 'left-right' labels—and a return to a 'cooperative' structure that integrates party militants and civil society. This strategy is proposed as a means to resist the rise of national-populism and prepare for the 2017 national elections.

The author diagnoses a crisis in political ecology caused by the Greens' alignment with the productivist Left, specifically the Socialist Party (PS), which led to electoral losses in 2014. The text proposes ten theses to rebuild the movement, emphasizing a return to 'contractual autonomy'—where alliances are based on specific policy content rather than 'Left/Right' labels—and the adoption of a 'cooperative' organizational model to engage civil society and prepare for the 2017 elections.

The author contends that the eurozone is facing a critical risk of deflation due to flawed austerity policies and the failure of the European Central Bank's conventional monetary tools. The text argues that standard quantitative easing (QE) is ineffective because it primarily benefits the wealthy and fails to stimulate lending during a 'liquidity trap'. As a solution, the document proposes 'overt money financing' or 'quantitative easing for the people' (QEP), which would involve the central bank providing debt-free money directly to governments to fund public works, tax cuts, or an unconditional basic income, thereby boosting demand without increasing public debt.

This collection of articles from the Green European Journal examines the instability of the current financial system, the risks posed by fossil fuel asset bubbles, and the need for a 'green' economic transition. It critiques the role of private bank money creation, the impact of austerity in the EU periphery, and the influence of banking lobbies on regulation, while proposing alternatives such as sovereign money, debt jubilees, and mandatory climate risk accounting for financial institutions.

The authors argue that while the Green finance policy plan was technically sound and based on party consensus, its overly technocratic communication and focus on numbers over vision led to electoral losses. They contend that the party failed to link tax proposals to a broader Green economic vision, such as the Green New Deal, and failed to motivate key social groups or counter negative campaigning from opponents. The text concludes that future campaigns must prioritize a positive, value-driven narrative and clearly articulate the macroeconomic benefits of green investments to avoid being perceived as mere 'number-crunchers'.

The authors critique current European economic strategies as failing socially and environmentally, advocating instead for a 'green conversion' of industry. Drawing on the 1970s Lucas Aerospace and LIP factory examples, they propose shifting production from energy-intensive consumption to resilient products through worker-led innovation and democratic work organization. The paper suggests implementing 'Ecological Enterprise Zones' in post-industrial areas of Britain and refocusing EU convergence funding to support circular economies and social ownership, arguing that moving away from corporate profit-driven models is essential for achieving a sustainable, low-energy economy.

The author contends that de-industrialisation is not a viable path to ecological goals, as industry is essential for financing welfare states, creating sustainable jobs, and providing the technology needed for the energy transition. The text advocates for a European industrial policy that internalises environmental costs via carbon pricing and ecotaxation, while ensuring social inclusiveness to overcome political resistance from carbon and nuclear lobbies.

The author contends that current EU crisis management is a 'patchwork' where binding austerity rules are imposed on Member States while the responsibility for economic growth and unemployment remains national. To resolve this, the document proposes a federal structure characterized by a substantially increased EU budget, the mutualisation of debts through 'Eurobonds', and the implementation of EU-wide taxes following tax harmonisation. Central to this transition is the empowerment of the European Parliament with sole legislative initiative and budgetary sovereignty to ensure democratic legitimacy.

The Luxembourg Greens oppose the Fiscal Treaty, asserting that its debt brake mandates austerity and deepens social inequalities by ignoring the revenue side of public budgets. The document argues that austerity has failed to trigger economic recovery and instead proposes a Green New Deal focused on green infrastructure and environmental industrial transition. It suggests that a genuine European solution requires a minimum tax base to stop tax competition and the use of Eurobonds or a common sinking fund to manage national debt burdens.