Search Climate Insights Directory

The author criticizes the European Commission for seeking advice on making the EU taxonomy more inclusive of 'non-green' sectors, arguing that this is a concession to polluter lobbyists. The text asserts that the taxonomy's purpose is to identify activities contributing to the ecological transition and improve transparency, rather than simply rewarding marginal carbon improvements. It concludes that instead of weakening the current framework, the EU should develop a 'significantly harmful' taxonomy to actively divert funds away from environmentally damaging activities.

The Clean Air Task Force asserts that the EU's draft TEN-E regulation neglects geologic storage, which is essential for decarbonizing hard-to-abate sectors and achieving negative emissions. The author calls for the regulation to cover the full carbon capture and storage value chain, including various transport modes like ships and trucks, and to ensure non-discriminatory third-party access to infrastructure.

The document advocates for a transition to zero-carbon fuels like hydrogen and ammonia to address the high emissions of the marine shipping sector, which is identified as a "hard to abate" industry. It details production pathways including electrolysis and gas reforming with carbon capture and storage (CCS), and proposes federal policy interventions such as the American Energy Innovation Act of 2020, production tax credits, and the creation of regional fuel hubs to reduce costs and build necessary infrastructure.

The Climate Bonds Initiative presents a framework to categorise economic activities based on their role in a net-zero transition and establishes five principles to ensure transition labels are scientifically credible and ambitious. It distinguishes between 'green' and 'transition' labels based on the long-term viability of the activity in a low-carbon economy.

The document explores the intersection of COVID-19 recovery and climate action, arguing that state bailout packages and stimulus measures provide a short window to drive decarbonization and align recovery with the Paris Agreement. It examines the shifting role of the state, the potential for universal basic income to support transitioning workers, and the opportunity to leverage increased public trust in science to counter populism. The paper also highlights the risk of "quick hit" high-carbon responses and the need to avoid backsliding into business-as-usual development.

The briefing positions hydrogen as a necessary partner to electrification in the energy transition, particularly for heavy industry and long-range transport. It details the transition from fossil-fuel-based 'grey' and 'blue' hydrogen to 'green' hydrogen produced via renewable-powered electrolysis. The text highlights hydrogen's potential to decarbonize mineral extraction and steelmaking, while noting that global production must scale significantly from current levels to align with science-based climate pathways.

The document argues that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is essential for the EU to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, particularly for harder-to-abate sectors like cement, steel, and chemicals. The signatories call for the Clean Industrial Deal to address critical gaps, including the lack of operational commercial-scale storage sites in the EU and the need for cross-border transport networks. Key recommendations include ensuring geographically balanced storage development to avoid leaving Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe behind, creating strong demand signals for decarbonised products through public procurement, and addressing funding gaps via the Competitiveness Fund and Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI). The letter also emphasizes the need for international partnerships, specifically mentioning the removal of regulatory barriers to access storage in the UK and the Mediterranean Sea.

Europe is redefining carbon capture as a strategic building block for its 2050 climate neutrality goals, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors like cement and steel. While the region is shifting toward an infrastructure hub model to achieve economies of scale—with projects like Northern Lights in Norway and Porthos in the Netherlands—deployment remains slow. The author contends that current funding instruments and the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) are insufficient on their own, calling for bold, per-ton deployment subsidies similar to those used for renewables or the US 45Q tax credit to accelerate commercial scale-up.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) advocates for the inclusion of diverse CO2 transport and storage projects in the EU's PCI and PMI lists to enable the decarbonisation of hard-to-abate sectors. CATF emphasizes the need to expand infrastructure beyond the North Sea to Southern, Central, and Eastern Europe, and to develop flexible transport networks using pipelines, shipping, barges, and trains. The document highlights that by 2050, 300 to 640 million tonnes of CO2 must be captured and stored annually in the EU, with at least 30% of industrial emissions requiring transport to non-North Sea storage.

The undersigned authors express concern that a provisional agreement on RePowerEU would weaken the EU Innovation Fund by allowing Member States to use its grants (60%) and front-loading ETS allowances (40%) to raise revenues. They argue that reducing the fund contradicts the needs of Europe's industrial transformation, noting that the fund's first call in 2021 was oversubscribed by more than 20 times. The letter highlights that nearly 50% of emissions reductions needed for 2050 goals depend on technologies not yet deployed at scale, particularly for hard-to-abate sectors like cement, steel, and chemicals. The authors warn that while the United States is implementing massive investment plans, the EU risks losing its industrial base and jobs if it fails to lower the cost of next-generation decarbonisation technologies. Finally, they urge Member States to reject the European Commission's proposal to auction allowances from the Market Stability Reserve, as this could increase emissions and lower the carbon price signal.

The report asserts that fossil gas cannot be a transition fuel due to methane leakage and the urgent need to cut global carbon emissions by 50% by 2030. It criticizes gas blending as an inefficient strategy and advocates for the scaling of low-carbon hydrogen, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors like steel production, while warning that electrolysers must be paired with new renewable energy generation to avoid hindering grid decarbonisation.

The report identifies six key mechanisms that taxonomies use to manage the transition of high-emission activities: periodic review of evolving criteria, forward-looking criteria, gradation, specific measures, sunset dates/phase-out guidelines, and transition plan requirements. It analyzes these mechanisms across different taxonomy archetypes—binary, 'traffic light', mixed, and standalone—and provides case studies from the EU, Australia, Singapore, Rwanda, and China to demonstrate their practical application. The document emphasizes that while no single mechanism is inherently superior, their credibility depends on robust governance, science-based pathways, and the avoidance of carbon lock-in.

The report analyzes the role of taxonomies in climate transition finance, identifying six specific mechanisms used to define and evaluate transitional activities. It examines different taxonomy archetypes—binary, traffic-light, and mixed—and provides case studies from the EU, Australia, Singapore, Rwanda, China, and others to illustrate how these mechanisms are integrated to ensure credible decarbonization pathways.

The report identifies six core mechanisms used by taxonomies to manage the transition of hard-to-abate sectors: revision of criteria over time, forward criteria, shading, measures, sunset dates, and transition plan requirements. It analyzes these mechanisms across different taxonomy archetypes—binary, traffic light, and mixed—using case studies from the EU, Australia, Singapore, Rwanda, and China to demonstrate how static criteria can be used to assess a dynamic decarbonization process.

The Financing Steel Decarbonization (FSD) instrument is designed to mobilize private finance for the adoption of commercially available and pre-commercial low-carbon technologies in India's steel sector. It consists of two entities: the Steel Decarbonization Financing Facility (SDF), a blended debt fund, and the Steel Decarbonization Initiative (SDI), a service provider for project implementation. Over five years, FSD intends to deploy nearly USD 1 billion to mobilize an additional USD 3.4 billion in private investment, targeting a 25% reduction in emission intensity for approximately 20 MTPA of capacity.

The briefing contends that converting fossil gas infrastructure to other energy sources is generally unrealistic due to technical challenges, prohibitive costs, and insufficient projected energy volumes. It asserts that hydrogen and biogas cannot replace the scale of fossil gas, and that 'blending' serves only to prolong fossil gas dependency. While it acknowledges limited viability for converting long-distance pipelines and geological storage for 'hard-to-abate' sectors, it concludes that no new gas infrastructure is justified based on future conversion potential.

The document challenges the gas industry's claims that existing and new fossil gas infrastructure can be converted to hydrogen or biogas to avoid stranded assets. It argues that projected energy volumes for hydrogen and bioenergy by 2050 are far too low to justify current gas infrastructure levels. While it acknowledges limited potential for converting long-distance pipelines and geological storage for 'hard-to-decarbonize sectors', it dismisses biogas as unsustainable and LNG terminal conversion as economically non-viable. Reclaim Finance recommends that financial actors cease all support for gas expansion.

The document identifies critical bottlenecks in Colombia's energy transition, specifically in transmission infrastructure and licensing, which cause project delays of three to six years. It argues that while capital is available, there is a shortage of bankable, large-scale projects. To bridge a projected annual investment gap of 27.7 billion COP (approximately 7.5 billion USD) in clean energy for 2026-2030, the report recommends utilizing blended finance, asset securitization, and a dedicated economic transition fund to support regions dependent on fossil fuels, where 448,000 jobs are at risk by 2035.

The U.S. is leading global CCUS development, driven by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, with over 120 projects in planning or construction. China is rapidly expanding its capacity, having commissioned its first million-ton project in 2022 and developing several large-scale demonstration projects. Both nations face significant barriers: the U.S. struggles with commercial bank financing and public perception, while China lacks a comprehensive regulatory framework and large-scale transport infrastructure. Under the Sunnylands Statement, the two countries aim to advance at least five large-scale cooperative CCUS projects each by 2030.

The briefing examines the climate policy landscapes of the U.S. and China, noting that while the U.S. lacks a national carbon price, it has significant subnational activity. China has established the world's largest emissions trading scheme (ETS) but maintains that it is not obligated to provide international climate finance as a developing nation. Both countries are advancing corporate climate disclosure rules, though they differ on the requirement for Scope 3 emissions. The paper suggests cooperation on sustainable procurement, data standards for emission accounting, and subnational carbon market exchanges.