Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies a critical gap between current Canadian utility planning and the electricity supply needed for net-zero, suggesting that consumption must at least double by 2050. It proposes five catalysts to accelerate this transition, focusing on three supply-side actions: embedding net-zero mandates into regulator and utility roles, aligning resource planning with decarbonization pathways, and leveraging private and Indigenous capital to fund infrastructure. The document highlights that while Canada has abundant renewable resources, conservative demand forecasting and regulatory frameworks focused solely on low cost and reliability currently hinder the necessary build-out.

The document identifies a critical gap between current electricity planning and the capacity needed for net-zero goals, proposing five catalysts—including regulatory reform and private investment—to accelerate the transition in Canada.

The report argues that while Canada has a clean electricity advantage, it faces a significant risk of complacency. It identifies three cross-cutting barriers: a 'plug-or-socket' dilemma between supply and demand, policy uncertainty, and a focus on 'wild card' technologies over 'safe bets' like electrification. To overcome these, the report proposes five catalysts: business-led near-term electrification plans, net-zero mandates for utilities and regulators, alignment of utility planning with net-zero pathways, the implementation of performance standards and ZEV mandates, and the use of innovative public-private-Indigenous financing to crowd in private investment.

The document outlines a strategic framework for Canada to accelerate business electrification to reach net-zero by 2050. It identifies key barriers, such as the 'chicken-and-egg' dilemma between electricity supply and demand, and proposes five catalysts: short-term corporate action plans, integrating net-zero into utility mandates, aligning utility planning with net-zero trajectories, establishing clear performance standards and carbon pricing, and attracting private investment through innovative partnerships.

The report argues that while Canada has a competitive advantage in clean electricity, industrial electrification is stalled by technical gaps, grid reliability concerns, and the low cost of natural gas. It focuses on the manufacturing, mining, and construction sectors, noting that industry electricity use must increase from 25% to 41% by 2050. To accelerate this, the authors propose three primary catalysts: the development of near-term corporate electrification plans and pilots, the alignment of utility planning with net-zero pathways to ensure power supply, and the use of financial mechanisms like carbon contracts for difference to provide carbon pricing certainty.

The report identifies the manufacturing, construction, and mining sectors as having high potential for electrification to reduce Canada's industrial greenhouse gas emissions. It highlights three primary barriers: technical readiness for hard-to-abate sectors, concerns over electricity reliability and availability, and the low cost of natural gas. To overcome these, the report proposes three catalysts: the development of short-term electrification plans by companies, the alignment of utility planning with net-zero trajectories, and the implementation of guaranteed carbon pricing mechanisms, such as carbon contracts for difference.

The report finds that India's energy budgeting remains heavily skewed toward fossil fuels, with subsidies for coal, oil, and gas being nine times larger than those for clean energy in FY 2021. While fossil fuel subsidies have fallen 72% since 2014, public sector undertakings (PSUs) and public finance institutions (PFIs) continue to provide substantial support to fossil projects, often lacking clear net-zero roadmaps. The analysis reveals a stark gap between revenue and social costs: conservative externalities for fossil fuels in FY 2020 (INR 1,441,464 crore) were more than double the revenues generated (INR 6,52,564 crore). The authors recommend phasing out fossil fuel support, diversifying PSU investments, and using strategic taxation to fund a just transition and clean energy infrastructure.

The briefing concludes that BP is not on track for the 1.5°C goal, as its projected emissions will exceed its allocated carbon budget by 2033. Despite pledges to reach Net Zero by 2050, the analysis finds that BP's short-to-medium term carbon intensity remains too high and its capital expenditure continues to favor fossil fuels over renewables.

Reclaim Finance has submitted a series of critical questions to BNP Paribas ahead of its May 2022 General Meeting. The document argues that the bank's current sectoral policies are insufficient to meet a 1.5°C warming trajectory, citing continued support for major oil and gas developers like Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies. It specifically highlights the bank's indirect support for the EACOP project in Uganda and Tanzania, its failure to exclude parent companies of coal miners like Glencore and RWE, and its financial ties to companies linked to tropical deforestation. The organization calls for a total stop to new fossil fuel infrastructure financing and more stringent exclusion criteria for non-conventional hydrocarbons and coal.

The document argues that TotalEnergies is not on track for the 1.5°C climate goal, as its cumulative greenhouse gas emissions are projected to exceed the compatible carbon budget by at least 31.8% by 2050. It finds that the company's strategy remains driven by oil and gas expansion, with production levels expected to increase by 18.4% by 2030 compared to 2020. The analysis highlights an unsustainable reliance on carbon offsets and a CAPEX allocation that continues to favor fossil fuels over renewables.

The document identifies the current global financial system as a barrier to sustainability, noting a funding gap of USD 8.4–10.1 trillion for the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals in developing countries. It argues that financial flows are primarily driven by perceived profitability rather than sustainability, and calls for the 'greening' of market-based investments to move from voluntary ESG initiatives to standard working practices. The author recommends that governments use fiscal measures like carbon pricing and that multilateral development institutions make sustainability norms a condition for co-financing. Additionally, the paper emphasizes the need for international harmonization of financial regulations and the equal partnership of developing countries in shaping the global sustainable finance architecture.

The paper argues that developing countries lack the financial sector capacity to fund the scale of investment required for low-carbon transitions. It distinguishes between 'commercially viable technologies' that need scaled-up investment and 'financially underserved technologies' that require de-risking. Proposed solutions include the creation of a Global Clean Investment Risk Mitigation Mechanism (GCI-RMM), the implementation of sustainable taxonomies and corporate disclosures, and the use of carbon pricing. The authors emphasize that multilateral cooperation is essential to harmonize these regulations and increase grant-based concessional finance to catalyze private investment.

The document introduces the 'provisioning systems' framework as a tool to analyze how human needs are met without exceeding planetary boundaries. It argues that simple policy tools like carbon pricing are insufficient because they ignore the systemic interdependencies between material stocks, techniques, and institutional elements (households, markets, the commons, and the state). Through examples of cellphone charging and mobility (road vs. air transport), the authors demonstrate how different techno-economic paradigms create different barriers to decarbonization. The paper concludes that transformative change requires multi-scalar, reflexive governance and policy portfolios that address systemic lock-ins and ensure a just transition for both producers and consumers.

The report examines the global and regional context of oil and gas transitions, focusing on the North Sea region. It identifies a significant 'ambition gap' between national net-zero targets and actual industrial strategies in the UK and Norway, while noting Denmark as a first-mover with a 2050 phase-out date. Using a scorecard analysis based on seven just transition principles, the report finds that while Scotland leads in support for workers and communities, the UK and Norway struggle with carbon lock-in due to continued licensing and a lack of comprehensive regional support policies.

Reclaim Finance criticizes AXA and AXA IM for maintaining financial support for new fossil fuel projects despite their public commitment to a 1.5°C trajectory. The statement highlights that AXA continues to provide insurance for new oil and gas projects and that AXA IM has historically voted in favor of insufficient climate plans from oil majors like TotalEnergies, Shell, and BP.

The research identifies a broad public concern for climate change in the UK, though this is often decoupled from an understanding of 'net zero' as a specific policy solution. Using a values-based segmentation model, the study finds that while most Britons are open to 'doing their bit,' there is deep cynicism regarding political trust and the fair distribution of costs. Key findings highlight that fairness is experienced emotionally and varies by income level, with a strong consensus that the wealthy and big businesses should bear more of the financial burden. The report suggests framing net zero as an opportunity for financial wellbeing and energy independence to bridge political and social divides.

The letter asserts that GFANZ is acting as a "smokescreen" for the financial sector's lack of progress on decarbonization. It highlights a gap between GFANZ's goal of halving emissions by 2030 and the reality that many members continue to fund new coal, oil, and gas projects. The authors demand that GFANZ implement interim milestones, absolute emission targets, mandatory Scope 3 targets for fossil fuel companies, and a ban on using offsets to meet 2030 targets.

Marcene Mitchell of WWF International asserts that the world is in a climate crisis and must transition away from fossil fuels within eight years to avoid catastrophic consequences. She advocates for immediate investments in renewable energy, electric grid modernization, and nature-based carbon sequestration, while calling for comprehensive federal legislation in the United States to accelerate economic transformation and ensure equity in the transition to net-zero by 2050.

Holy Cross Energy's Power+ program provides residential customers in Colorado with distributed battery storage through a tariff-based on-bill financing model. By leveraging USDA loan capital, the program eliminates upfront costs for participants and allows the utility to manage peak demand and integrate more renewable energy. The program aims to support the utility's goals of 100 percent renewable energy by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2035, while providing homeowners with backup power during climate-driven outages.

A letter from various health professionals and organizations to Canadian leaders advocating for a societal shift toward well-being to address the climate and biodiversity crises.