Search Climate Insights Directory

The text examines the forced relocation of villages near the Garzweiler lignite mine in Germany's Rhine Valley. It highlights the emotional and social trauma of residents, the inadequacy of financial compensation for non-material losses, and the perceived failure of the German government to accelerate the energy transition (Energiewende) while protecting local communities. The authors describe the emergence of activist movements like 'Alle Dörfer Bleiben' as a response to the lack of democratic influence and the prioritization of mining interests under the Federal Mining Act.

Reclaim Finance disputes BNP Paribas' claims that its 2020 fossil fuel financing was an exceptional response to the Covid-19 crisis, arguing instead that the bank is the largest European financier of the industry and the 4th largest globally. The organization contends that the bank's sectoral policies are ineffective against oil and gas majors and that its use of the PACTA methodology should not delay immediate action to halt sector expansion.

Reclaim Finance disputes BNP Paribas' claims that its 2020 fossil fuel financing was an exceptional response to the Covid-19 crisis or supported companies in transition. The organization highlights that BNP Paribas was the largest European and fourth largest global financier of fossil fuels in 2020, with $41 billion in funding, and argues that the bank's sector policies fail to restrict funding to oil and gas majors despite their lack of alignment with the Paris Agreement.

The report finds that the 60 largest global banks provided $3.8 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2016 to 2020. Despite a 9% drop in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, financing levels remained higher than in 2016. JPMorgan Chase is identified as the world's worst fossil fuel banker, with $317 billion provided over the five-year period. The analysis highlights a significant gap between banks' 'net zero by 2050' pledges and their continued funding of fossil fuel expansion, particularly in sectors like LNG, offshore oil and gas, and coal. The report also details the human rights and environmental impacts of specific projects, such as the East African Crude Oil Pipeline and the Line 3 pipeline, and argues that current bank policies are insufficient to align with the 1.5C goal of the Paris Agreement.

The text advocates for a new transatlantic narrative that integrates civil society 'transformers'—including climate activists, women's movements, and marginalized groups—into political discourse. It emphasizes that democratic resilience requires diverse representation in institutions and the prioritization of social justice and the climate crisis over old security-centric models.

The author contends that the Biden-Harris administration provides an opportunity to reboot transatlantic relations by integrating diverse civil society movements—such as those focused on climate, racial justice, and gender equality—into the political discourse. The text argues that the previous focus on a common security policy is obsolete and should be replaced by a narrative of democratic resilience and inclusivity. It highlights the role of grassroots networks and regional initiatives, such as the 'We Are Still In' and 'Under2Coalition' alliances, as models for strengthening solidarity. The document concludes that achieving a 'build back better' transatlantic relationship requires structural and financial support for civil society and the implementation of joint regulations on hate speech and disinformation.

The document advises journalists to treat COP26 with urgency, framing coverage around the 1.5 C temperature goal, climate justice, and the political barriers to solutions. It emphasizes the need for advance coverage and the localization of global climate impacts to make the summit relevant to diverse audiences.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Enbridge for securing a $1.0 billion "Sustainability Linked" credit facility from five major banks, asserting that the company's ESG goals are insufficient and serve to mask the continued expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure. The author contends that Enbridge's net-zero and GHG intensity targets only cover scope 1 and 2 emissions, representing less than 2% of the lifecycle emission intensity of oil sands. Furthermore, the document highlights that the Line 3 pipeline project in Minnesota, supported by such funding, increases GHG emissions and violates the treaty rights of the Anishinaabeg.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Enbridge for securing a $1 billion sustainability-linked credit facility while continuing to invest heavily in fossil fuels and the Line 3 pipeline. The organization contends that Enbridge's ESG goals are insufficient as they only cover scope 1 and 2 emissions, ignoring the vast majority of the carbon footprint associated with oil sands transport. The document highlights that the Line 3 project in Minnesota violates indigenous rights and significantly increases greenhouse gas emissions, calling for stricter financial regulations to prevent such greenwashing.

The briefing examines the initial net-zero announcements from Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, and Wells Fargo. While these institutions have committed to 2050 targets, the document notes that they are in early stages, lacking specific interim targets, defined pathways, and clear coverage standards for business units like capital markets. It highlights varying organizational responses, ranging from Wells Fargo's centralized Institute for Sustainable Finance to Goldman Sachs' hybrid model, and notes the adoption of the Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials (PCAF) by several banks to improve emissions reporting consistency.

Trend Asia and partner organizations criticize PT PLN's commitment to stop coal-fired power plant (PLTU) projects that have not reached financial closing, citing a lack of transparency and the continued risk of projects like PLTU Indramayu 2 and PLTU Tanjung Jati A. The statement also condemns the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) for its role in funding the Cirebon 2 expansion, arguing that JBIC's pledge to exit coal is too late and should include stopping disbursements for ongoing projects to align with the Paris Agreement.

The Hydropower Criteria establish eligibility for Climate Bonds Certification by screening projects for GHG emissions intensity, power density, and adherence to environmental and social standards via an ESG Gap Analysis Tool.

The report identifies significant opportunities for green finance in Central America and the Caribbean (CAC), noting that while the market is small with only six deals to date, there is high potential for expansion in renewable energy, low-carbon transport, sustainable water and waste management, sustainable agriculture, and the blue economy. It highlights the role of the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI) and regional stock exchanges in driving this growth, while providing a guide for issuers to align with international standards like the Climate Bonds Taxonomy.

The report highlights Malaysia's leadership in sustainable finance, particularly through the issuance of green sukuk, and identifies a significant pipeline of green infrastructure projects. It emphasizes the need for private capital to meet a cumulative infrastructure investment requirement of roughly USD 460bn from 2016-2040. Key opportunities are detailed in renewable energy (especially solar and biomass), low-carbon transport (rail and EVs), sustainable water management, and waste-to-energy projects.

The document argues that the EU's current legal framework, which excludes installations under the Emissions Trading System (ETS) from certain Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) requirements, is insufficient to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal. ClientEarth contends that the ETS alone cannot drive full decarbonisation because it lacks a focus on prevention technologies and allows for the displacement of pollution. The brief proposes a synergetic approach where the IED provides mandatory, scientifically-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emission limit values (ELVs) and energy efficiency standards based on Best Available Techniques (BAT). This would align EU policy with the 'prevention principle' and the 'Hierarchy of action on pollution', ensuring that emissions are avoided by design rather than just traded. The author concludes that deleting Art. 9 IED and Art. 26 ETSD would create a 'win-win-win' for operators, the climate, and the environment by stimulating technological innovation and ensuring a level playing field.

The document analyzes the legal framework for shareholder climate proposals in Japan, noting that amendments to articles of incorporation are the only viable legal pathway for such proposals under the Japanese Companies Act. It highlights a landmark proposal at Mizuho Financial Group that received 34% support and argues that such proposals, while requiring a two-thirds majority to pass, can still influence corporate behavior, as seen with Mizuho's pledge to stop financing coal projects by 2050. The briefing compares these Japanese mechanisms to 'special resolutions' used in the UK and encourages boards and investors to support proposals aligned with the Paris Agreement.

This policy brief examines the supply and demand barriers preventing National Development Banks (NDBs) from financing green urban infrastructure. It introduces a 12-dimension 'maturity model' across strategic, financial, business, and operational parameters to help NDBs optimize their capacity. The brief argues that while NDBs are ideally positioned as intermediaries, few have the specific mandates or capitalization required to support local governments, necessitating coordinated action from national governments and development finance institutions.

The document advocates for a global carbon price on shipping to drive decarbonisation, suggesting that such a measure must avoid offsets and free permits while using revenues to fund green infrastructure and support vulnerable nations through rebates rather than exemptions.

The report presents survey data from March 2021 on U.S. registered voters' attitudes toward international climate action. It finds broad support for the U.S. reducing emissions regardless of other countries' actions, participation in the Paris Climate Agreement, and pressuring other nations to reduce carbon pollution. While there is strong consensus that developing and industrialized nations should do more to address global warming, support for providing financial and technical aid to developing countries for mitigation and adaptation is more divided along partisan lines.

The report presents survey data from March 2021 on U.S. registered voters' perspectives on international climate action. It finds broad support for the U.S. reducing emissions regardless of other nations' actions, participation in the Paris Climate Agreement, and pressuring other countries to reduce carbon pollution. While there is strong consensus that developing and industrialized nations should do more to address global warming, support for providing financial aid for mitigation and adaptation to developing countries is more divided along partisan lines.