Search Climate Insights Directory

The document highlights Indonesia's climate crisis, noting record temperatures in Larantuka and the country's position as a top ten global greenhouse gas emitter due to coal dependency. It criticizes the government's continued construction of coal-fired power plants (PLTU), the use of biomass co-firing that threatens forests and indigenous peoples, and the environmental damage caused by nickel mining for electric vehicle batteries. The guide advocates for community-based renewable energy and provides a framework for individual and collective action, including reducing transport emissions, mindful consumption, and demanding political accountability.

The report examines the socio-ecological impacts of energy plantation forests (HTE) in Java, specifically in Sukabumi, Grobogan, and Bojonegoro. It argues that Perhutani uses the narrative of 'critical land' and 'energy transition' to reclaim land from local farmers, effectively continuing a history of agrarian extraction. The study finds that the introduction of biomass crops like gamal and kaliandra restricts community access to food and fuel, transforms these species into 'flex trees' for industrial profit, and employs local labor under precarious, low-wage conditions. The document concludes that these projects often fail economically while exacerbating land conflicts and environmental degradation, recommending a shift toward genuine forestry land reform.

The paper argues that biomass energy projects, framed as climate change mitigation, serve as a mechanism for 'energy grabbing' and the reconcentration of land control by Perhutani. Through case studies in Sukabumi, Grobogan, and Bojonegoro, it demonstrates how the classification of land as 'unproductive' or 'critical' is used to dispossess local farmers and transform them into low-paid laborers. The study finds that the promotion of gamal and kaliandra as 'flex trees' restricts community access to essential resources like firewood and fodder, while triggering localized resistance and criminalization of farmers.

The report finds that G20 governments provided at least USD 168 billion in public financial support for renewable power in 2023, which is less than one third of the USD 535 billion provided in fossil fuel subsidies. Advanced economies and China account for 95% of this support, leaving many emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) at risk. To meet the 2030 tripling target, public support in G20 countries may need to double to approximately USD 336 billion per year. The report highlights a shift from feed-in tariffs toward market-based mechanisms like auctions and a growing emphasis on domestic manufacturing support in the US, EU, and India.

The document positions agroforestry as a critical tool for bioenergy security, noting that traditional biomass is unlikely to be displaced by modern energy sources in the near term in specific rural regions. It emphasizes that integrating biomass production on farms reduces environmental risks and labor drudgery while supporting food security. To achieve sustainable sourcing, the brief advocates for scaling up efficient energy conversion technologies—such as improved cookstoves, briquettes, and biogas infrastructure—and implementing adaptable land tenure systems.

China has significantly reduced coal power plant approvals in early 2024 as massive additions of wind and solar power meet incremental electricity demand. While construction of previously permitted projects remains high, the shift toward clean energy is driving a decline in coal power generation and signaling a potential peak in CO2 emissions before 2030.

The document introduces "climate-beneficial bioenergy," a concept developed by the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) to distinguish modern, climate-positive bioenergy from conventional systems that may cause deforestation or disrupt food supplies. To be climate-beneficial, systems must couple biomass with engineered processes to permanently store carbon, potentially achieving net carbon dioxide removal (CDR). The author argues these systems are essential for hard-to-decarbonize sectors and for counterbalancing residual emissions in sectors like agriculture. Key attributes include using waste streams, non-food crops on marginal land, or forest thinnings, and employing technologies such as gasification or pyrolysis with carbon capture and storage (CCS). The document emphasizes the need for lifecycle assessments and policy safeguards to prevent detrimental environmental and social impacts.

The policy brief outlines a framework for a production tax credit (PTC) to decarbonize industrial heat. It argues that the credit should target 'useful heat' used in manufacturing processes, be refundable to maximize investment efficiency, and utilize a rate based on heat temperature and power to account for varying technology costs. The author recommends excluding biomass and byproducts while focusing on scope 1 emissions to avoid complexity and ensure the policy targets industrial facilities rather than the electricity grid.

The document compares current law with the House version of the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), highlighting proposed changes to grant selection criteria, loan guarantee limits, and discretionary funding. It notes that the Senate version is pending. REAP provides financial assistance to agricultural producers and rural small businesses for renewable energy systems and energy efficiency upgrades.

The report argues that Indonesia's biomass co-firing program primarily benefits large conglomerates and politically connected elites rather than promoting a just energy transition. It highlights how companies affiliated with groups like Sinarmas, Korindo, and Medco dominate energy plantation forest (HTE) concessions, often through opaque ownership structures or 'shadow companies'. The document details instances of deforestation, land conflicts with indigenous peoples (notably in Papua and NTB), and the persistence of 'carbon debts' resulting from the conversion of natural forests to HTE. Furthermore, it notes that some biomass suppliers are also coal traders, and that the actual biomass used in PLTUs often consists of unregulated sawdust rather than the planned wood pellets, undermining the program's environmental claims.

The report examines Energy Communities (ECs) in the EU, highlighting their role in democratising energy and achieving climate goals. It distinguishes between Citizen Energy Communities (CECs) and Renewable Energy Communities (RECs), noting that as of 2022, over 9,000 ECs were operational in the EU. The document details the climate, economic, and social benefits of these models, such as reduced energy poverty and increased grid resilience. Through case studies of Germany, Denmark, Latvia, and Greece, it illustrates how national legislation and financial incentives—like feed-in tariffs and grants—drive adoption. The report concludes that while the EU is a leader in these models, non-EU nations should consider similar legal recognitions to support a just energy transition.

The report warns that 'unabated' coal phase-down strategies—including co-firing, retrofitting with CCS, and using carbon credits—risk extending the life of fossil fuel infrastructure and providing incomplete emission reductions. It urges public development banks to avoid these 'false solutions' to ensure public funds support rapid coal retirement rather than prolonging coal usage.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes the EU's Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF) provisional deal, claiming it allows carbon removals and temporary storage to substitute for actual emission reductions. The organization warns that the framework enables double counting between voluntary markets and national climate policies, incentivizes short-term carbon storage that lacks long-term climate benefit, and employs insufficient sustainability criteria for biomass. While noting some positive inclusions like mandatory biodiversity co-benefits for carbon farming, CMW asserts the CRCF is a 'missed opportunity' that could deter climate action and calls for the deal to be rejected and rebooted.

The document advocates for a radical shift in banking practices to support the energy transition, specifically calling for a 6:1 investment ratio in favor of sustainable power supply over fossil fuels. Based on IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) projections, the author argues that total annual energy sector investments must rise to US$4.7 trillion by 2030, with energy transition investments exceeding US$4.2 trillion. Reclaim Finance emphasizes that this ratio should specifically target sustainable technologies—solar PV, wind, grids, and storage—while excluding biomass, nuclear energy, and Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS), which it deems too risky or damaging. The document concludes that banks should set specific targets for sustainable power, end all support for fossil fuel expansion, and incorporate the 6:1 ratio into credible climate transition plans.

The document argues that limiting global warming to 1.5°C requires a radical shift in financial flows, moving away from fossil fuel expansion toward sustainable energy. Based on IEA data, it proposes a 6:1 ratio for banks: investing six times more in sustainable electricity supply than in fossil fuels by 2030. It specifies that 'sustainable' energy should focus on mature technologies like solar, wind, grids, and storage, while excluding nuclear, biomass, and carbon capture (CCUS).

The document explores the role of advanced bioenergy systems in decarbonizing agriculture, emphasizing a 'carbon-negative circular bioeconomy' that combines emissions reductions with permanent carbon dioxide removal (CDR). It identifies opportunities such as utilizing biogenic point sources, growing perennials on underutilized land, and replacing synthetic nitrogen fertilizers. However, it warns of risks including methane leakage from anaerobic digesters, detrimental land-use changes, and environmental justice concerns. The report argues for policy shifts that prioritize CDR over simple energy production and calls for increased research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) to scale cellulosic bioenergy technologies.

The report examines the energy landscapes of seven southern African states, highlighting a stark divide between vast renewable energy potential and a continued reliance on fossil fuels or traditional biomass. While most surveyed countries have established renewable energy targets and some have liberalized their energy markets, the transition is often hindered by governance challenges, high rural-urban electricity gaps, and the pursuit of new oil and gas reserves. The document advocates for an 'energy justice' framework to ensure that the shift to low-carbon energy is inclusive, transparent, and protects the rights of marginalized communities and future generations.

Reclaim Finance challenges the credibility of Crédit Agricole's December 2023 energy transition commitments, citing a lack of precise definitions for terms like "low-carbon energies" and "clean technologies." The organization argues that the bank's targets—including tripling annual renewable energy funding in France by 2030 to reach 3 billion euros—are insufficient compared to the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Net Zero Emission by 2050 scenario, which requires a 6:1 ratio of sustainable to fossil fuel energy financing by 2030.

Reclaim Finance challenges the credibility of Crédit Agricole's December 2023 climate objectives, citing a lack of precise definitions for terms like "low-carbon energies" and "clean technologies." The organization argues that the bank's targets—including a goal to reach 3 billion euros in annual renewable energy funding in France by 2030—are insufficient to meet the 1.5°C warming limit and fail to align with the IEA's recommended 6:1 ratio of sustainable electricity investment versus fossil fuel financing.

The document analyzes the cassava value web in Colombia, identifying its current uses in food, animal feed, and industrial materials, while highlighting potential for expansion into bioplastics and bioethanol. It maps commercial, financial, and knowledge linkages across four main production nuclei: Cauca, the Atlantic Coast, Orinoquía, and Amazonía. The paper argues that while Colombia is the third largest producer in Latin America, low productivity and limited technification hinder its competitiveness. It recommends developing inclusive supply chains, promoting sustainable agricultural practices to protect biodiversity, and increasing incentives for private sector innovation to transition toward a sustainable bioeconomy.