Search Climate Insights Directory

The report provides a detailed analysis of the implementation of Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs) in the EU, UK, and Australia. It examines the transition from free allocations to border adjustments in the EU, the UK's planned 2027 launch, and Australia's ongoing carbon leakage review. Additionally, it tracks the evolution of multilateral discussions at the WTO, noting a shift from general concerns about protectionism toward specific technical cooperation and interoperability.

The report provides a comprehensive overview of carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs) as tools to prevent carbon leakage. It details the operational timelines and design features of the EU and UK mechanisms, analyzes a proposed Australian framework, and tracks legislative efforts in the US, Canada, and Taiwan. Additionally, it examines the evolving nature of CBAM discussions at the WTO, noting a shift from general concern toward specific design cooperation and interoperability.

The briefing highlights that iron production accounts for over 80% of steel supply chain emissions and argues that a common 'near-zero emissions' iron definition is necessary to guide investment and trade. It proposes a threshold of 350 kgCO2e/t iron to exclude coal-based production and suggests that hydrogen-based direct reduction (DRI) is the primary commercial pathway to achieve this. To overcome supply chain complexities, the document advocates for direct procurement and 'book and claim' systems, announcing that RMI will design and test a climate-credible book and claim system for iron and steel in 2025.

The document advocates for transition-specific alignment targets—sector-specific metrics like zero-emission vehicle sales—to overcome the limitations of traditional GHG emission reduction targets, particularly regarding scope 3 emissions. It identifies risks in current GHG reporting, such as creative accounting and inadequate 'spend method' calculations, and recommends that standard setters develop consistent definitions and sectoral pathways to integrate these targets into national regulations and voluntary frameworks.

The IISD response to the DESNZ consultation argues that updated EIA guidance for fossil fuel projects should require the separate reporting of Scope 3, Category 11 emissions and the use of zero-emission baselines for new projects. It further recommends that the significance of emissions be assessed against science-based 1.5°C scenarios and the specific need for the project.

The report analyzes the lifecycle emissions of polyester t-shirts to identify decarbonization opportunities for chemical producers and retailers. It argues that defining emissions reduction thresholds at upstream stages, such as the PET resin step rather than the fabric step, is essential to stimulate investment in low-emission chemical production. The analysis categorizes solutions into near-term operational changes (reducing up to 47% of footprints), near-term capital investments (reducing 31%), and long-term innovations (reducing 13-28% or up to 45% with transformative feedstocks). To derisk these capital-intensive transitions, the report suggests aggregated demand from multiple sectors (automotive, healthcare, construction), the formation of buyers alliances, and the implementation of green public procurement, noting that a 10-50% shift in US military procurement for polyester and nylon equipment could represent $100-$500 million in spending.

The report finds significant disparities in climate progress across South Africa, with affluent cities and provinces leading in ambition while less wealthy regions lag. It highlights a one-directional influence where provincial strategies shape city policies, particularly in the Western Cape, and notes inconsistent just transition commitments within the private sector.

CBRE is implementing a multi-step engagement strategy to tackle Scope 3 emissions, which are over 50 times greater than its direct operational emissions. By identifying a core group of 7,500 suppliers responsible for 90% of its purchased goods and services emissions, the firm provides tailored support, including a free emissions calculation platform via Emitwise, to help small and medium-sized enterprises report data. While only 16% of engaged suppliers have provided all requested information, the company is improving response rates by integrating climate reporting into its Partner Excellence Program and translating resources into multiple languages.

The IISD response to the DESNZ consultation argues for more rigorous standards in assessing Scope 3 emissions for offshore oil projects, specifically calling for the separate reporting of Category 11 emissions, the use of zero-emission baselines, and the assessment of significance based on 1.5°C science-based scenarios rather than as a proportion of global emissions.

The report evaluates how national, provincial, city, and corporate entities in South Africa incorporate social justice into their net zero commitments. It finds significant disparities in ambition and implementation, with wealthy urban centres leading and less affluent provinces lagging. While the financial sector and some state-owned enterprises show strong just transition frameworks, many private companies and multinational corporations rely on vague offsetting strategies with limited socio-economic integration.

The report finds that the dairy and coffee house industries are failing to address methane emissions with urgency, with 18 out of 20 analysed companies scoring less than half of the available points in a performance assessment. While methane's climate impact is widely recognised, most companies lack specific reduction targets, credible action plans, or transparent, disaggregated reporting of methane emissions (CH4). Danone was the only company to set both a methane-specific target and an aligned detailed plan. The report highlights a significant gap in corporate accountability, noting that even members of the Dairy Methane Action Alliance (DMAA) generally achieve only about a third of the total possible score, though they outperform non-members.

The report outlines a framework for banks to implement robust climate transition plans and sectoral policies to eliminate support for coal, oil, gas, and unabated power generation. It advocates for a shift in financial flows toward sustainable power supply, recommending a 6:1 financing ratio in favor of sustainable energy over fossil fuels by 2030. The document specifies strict exclusion criteria for 'coal developers' and 'gas power developers,' demands transparent reporting on 'real-world economy' GHG emissions, and calls for a responsible climate lobbying policy aligned with 1.5°C pathways.

Brazil possesses a significant carbon competitiveness advantage due to its renewable-heavy electricity grid, but faces substantial risks from incoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs) and the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR). While 78% of its exports go to net zero-aligned markets, structural contradictions—such as continued fossil fuel exploration and the 'Devastation Bill'—threaten its climate credibility. The economy is heavily dependent on China, and recent unilateral tariffs from the US have introduced significant geopolitical volatility.

The document advocates for the full implementation of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), arguing that they are essential for the European Green Deal and sustainable finance. It warns that arbitrary reductions in reporting obligations would create legal uncertainty and undermine the ability of investors to allocate capital to the green transition. The authors emphasize that the standards already include significant flexibility through materiality assessments and phase-in periods, and they propose improving usability through practical guidance, capacity building for Member States, and the development of sector-specific standards.

Global Energy Monitor (GEM) identifies that five major oil and gas plant owners failed to disclose 10.7 million tonnes of CO2 emissions in 2022, resulting in an annual social cost of $2 billion. The report highlights how companies use the 'operational control' and 'financial control' approaches of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol to exclude assets from their reporting boundaries. Specifically, the Saudi Electricity Company failed to disclose over 7 million tonnes of CO2 from three plants, representing $1.3 billion in annual climate costs. Other analyzed entities, including Egyptian Electricity Holding Company, Calpine Corporation, Chubu Electric Power Co. Inc., and Entergy Corporation, also exhibited gaps between their reported emissions and their actual asset ownership.

The Oil & Gas Decarbonization Charter, launched at COP28 by 50 companies, is criticized for focusing on upstream operational emissions while ignoring the larger impact of burning produced fuels. Analysis shows that between January and September 2024, Charter members approved 68 new oil and gas fields containing 14 billion barrels of oil equivalent, which could release nearly 5 billion metric tonnes of CO2. Ten companies, including ADNOC, Saudi Aramco, Petrobras, TotalEnergies, and Shell, are responsible for over 90 percent of these new reserves. These projects represent a commitment of nearly USD 250 billion in expenditure. While the IEA's 1.5ºC pathway requires global production to decline by nearly 20 percent by 2030, Charter companies are projected to increase their production by 17 percent by 2030.

The briefing examines the climate impact of 22 global meat and dairy corporations, finding that their combined emissions are comparable to those of entire countries or major oil companies. It argues that the industry uses 'green smokescreens'—such as weak net-zero targets, unproven techno-fixes, and regenerative agriculture—to distract from the need to reduce livestock production. The document further highlights a lack of mandatory agricultural methane targets in the 11 countries where these companies are headquartered, attributing this to 'agricultural exceptionalism' and industry political influence.

The report examines 22 of the world's largest meat and dairy companies, finding that their combined emissions are comparable to those of major oil companies and entire nations. It argues that corporate net-zero targets are largely non-aligned with the 1.5°C warming limit and that the industry relies on 'techno-fixes'—such as feed additives and biogas—and 'regenerative agriculture' to distract from the need to reduce livestock production. The analysis further highlights a lack of mandatory agricultural methane targets in the 11 countries where these companies are headquartered, attributing this to 'agricultural exceptionalism' and industry political influence.

The report analyzes the environmental impact of the global data-center boom, identifying systemic challenges such as energy infrastructure lags and temporal-spatial mismatches between green power and demand. It proposes a comprehensive transformation pathway involving optimized site selection, enhanced energy efficiency through new metrics beyond PUE, and the adoption of diverse green power procurement options. The document emphasizes the potential for data centers to act as flexible grid resources and calls for mandatory carbon disclosure and standardized accounting to drive the transition.

The textile and garment sector is a major global emitter, with estimates ranging from 2% to 10% of annual global GHG emissions. Developing countries are particularly vulnerable to both the physical impacts of climate change—risking millions of jobs in hubs like Bangladesh and Vietnam—and the transition risks posed by new sustainability regulations in consumer markets. The document highlights the potential for border carbon adjustments (BCAs) and the EU's Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) to create non-tariff trade barriers. It also addresses the environmental crisis of textile waste dumping in Africa and South America. To ensure a just transition, the author argues for the inclusion of the sector in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), increased international financial and technical support, and a coordinated approach via the WTO to prevent protectionism.