Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that South African coal reserves earmarked for domestic use exceed the country's potential carbon budget through 2050, creating a risk of 'unburnable carbon' and stranded assets. It argues that current capital expenditure on developing new coal resources is incompatible with climate goals and urges investors to challenge the business models of coal miners.

The report argues that the EU ETS is failing due to a massive oversupply of allowances caused by the 2008 economic recession and industrial overallocation. Sandbag identifies a total excess of 3.1 billion tonnes (Gt) of allowances, including 2.2Gt from obsolete demand forecasts and 0.9Gt from industrial overallocation. The document highlights that 78% of the net surplus is concentrated among ten steel and cement companies, which have generated significant revenues from selling surplus permits. To remedy this, the report recommends the permanent cancellation of 3.1Gt of allowances from Phase 3 auctions, the establishment of a more ambitious Phase 4 carbon budget aligned with 2050 goals, and the introduction of mechanisms like a "heat exchanger" and a strategic demand-correction reserve to protect the system from future exogenous shocks.

The document is a compilation of research abstracts covering a wide array of climate-related topics. Key themes include the equity of burden-sharing in climate finance, the operationalization of REDD+ and MRV systems, the integration of adaptation into development planning (mainstreaming), and the transition to low-carbon energy systems. It examines specific case studies in regions such as Bangladesh, Mozambique, Nepal, and the Congo Basin, while analyzing global policy mechanisms like the UNFCCC, the Copenhagen Accord, and the Cancun Agreements.

The report analyzes the BASIC group's role in global climate diplomacy, arguing that while they appear as a unified bloc, their cooperation is conditioned by diverse domestic priorities and broader geopolitical ambitions. It examines the specific drivers for Brazil, South Africa, India, and China, and explores how the group balances its identity as developing nations with its rising global influence.

The report argues that current greenhouse gas emission reduction targets are insufficient to prevent devastating climate impacts and self-amplifying warming. It asserts that to maintain a 75% chance of staying below 2°C, global emissions must decline rapidly after 2015 and reach essentially zero by midcentury, a goal it claims is technically feasible and economically affordable.

The BASIC group—comprising Brazil, South Africa, India, and China—leverages its collective economic and geopolitical weight to advocate for developing country interests in climate negotiations, specifically demanding that industrialised countries bear primary responsibility for emission reductions and funding. While the group presents a 'common front' and aligns with the G77, it faces internal tensions due to vastly different domestic realities: China's superpower status, India's low per capita emissions, Brazil's focus on land-use emissions, and South Africa's coal-dependent energy sector. The brief suggests that while the group provides political shelter and leverage, its cohesion will be tested as negotiations move toward finer technical details and as South Africa prepares to host COP17.

The report argues that China can achieve a deep carbon reduction by 2050 through sectoral transformations in electricity, industry, transport, and buildings, provided it receives international financial and technological support. It proposes a combination of domestic carbon taxes, a future cap-and-trade system, and a new 'Inter-country Joint Mitigation Plan' to facilitate technology transfer. The analysis emphasizes that a low-carbon transition is essential for China's modernization, offering opportunities to move up the value chain and improve energy security, though it will require active labour market policies to manage job losses in heavy industry.

The Greenhouse Development Rights (GDRs) framework argues that an emergency climate stabilization program is only possible if the international effort-sharing impasse is broken by protecting developmental equity. It proposes a 'development threshold'—set indicatively at $7,500 per person per year (PPP)—below which individuals are exempt from the costs of climate mitigation and adaptation. National obligations are then calculated using a Responsibility and Capacity Indicator (RCI), which combines cumulative emissions since 1990 (responsibility) and income above the threshold (capacity), accounting for intra-national inequality. The report suggests that the United States and European Union bear the largest shares of the global burden, and that wealthy nations must fulfill a 'dual obligation' of aggressive domestic cuts and funding for international reductions to enable the South to decarbonize. To overcome North-South distrust, the authors propose a trust-building period until 2015 characterized by voluntary southern action and legally binding northern commitments.

The author contends that 'peak oil'—the point of maximum conventional oil production—is an economic crisis of 'the end of cheap energy' that compounds the climate crisis. As conventional oil becomes harder to extract, the industry shifts to non-conventional sources like oil sands, which have a significantly lower Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROEI) and higher carbon emissions. The paper warns that relying on these sources or turning to coal to offset oil prices will hinder climate mitigation. To address this, the author highlights the 'Zero Carbon Britain' strategy and the 'Transition Towns' movement as models for moving toward a low-energy, sustainable future.

The document is a Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP) for Anglo American Coal South Africa (AACSA) covering the period from 2016 to 2020. It outlines the company's energy and carbon emission management plan (ECO2MAN), detailing emission sources, calculation methodologies, and planned mitigation measures for its South African coal operations.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) has released a toolkit to guide citizens in submitting feedback on South Africa's Climate Change Bill. The guide outlines the lawmaking process, explains the role of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and identifies critical gaps in the Bill, such as the lack of urgent timeframes for emissions targets, weak transparency provisions, and the use of an outdated 2015 NDC as an interim trajectory. It urges the public to demand stronger penalties for exceeding carbon budgets and more meaningful public participation hearings.

The document describes the South African Climate Change Bill as a mechanism to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, manage climate risks such as floods and droughts, and define the roles of national, provincial, and local governments. It argues that a strong legal framework is necessary to hold polluters accountable, attract climate finance, and limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The text encourages public participation through community discussions and engagement with political leaders to ensure the final law is robust.

The Climate Change Bill, tabled in February 2022, aims to empower South Africa to respond to climate risks through the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and the management of climate adaptation. The document argues that a formal Act is necessary to hold government and emitters accountable, ensure legal certainty for ambitious climate action, and improve access to climate finance. To be effective, the author suggests the Bill must include strong enforcement penalties, science-based emission targets aligned with a 1.5°C limit, and high levels of transparency regarding carbon budgets.

The document describes a proposed Climate Change Bill in South Africa introduced in October 2022. The Bill aims to strengthen the country's response to climate change through three main pillars: regulating the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions via carbon budgets, managing adaptation to climate-related risks such as floods and droughts, and defining the responsibilities of government departments at national, provincial, and local levels. The text argues that the Bill is essential for protecting constitutional rights, attracting climate finance, and ensuring accountability. To be effective, the document asserts that the Bill requires strong penalties for exceeding carbon budgets, clear timelines for implementation, transparency regarding emissions data, and science-based targets to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. It concludes by encouraging citizens to study the Bill, engage with policymakers, and share personal experiences of climate change to ensure the resulting law is robust.

This responding statement, submitted by groundWork, argues against an appeal by Karpowership SA (PTY) Ltd regarding the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment's (DFFE) June 23, 2021, decision to refuse Environmental Authorisation (EA) for a gas-to-power project at the Port of Ngqura. groundWork contends that the project is neither necessary nor desirable, citing significant environmental risks, inadequate public participation, and the existence of more sustainable energy alternatives.

This document is a pollution prevention plan submission by Sasol South Africa (Pty) Limited and Sasol Mining (Pty) Limited. It details the company's production processes for liquid fuels, chemicals, ammonia, and nitric acid, alongside its coal mining operations. The report provides greenhouse gas (GHG) emission data for 2015 and 2016, the methodologies used for these calculations, and a list of mitigation interventions aimed at reducing GHG intensity through energy efficiency and process improvements.

The document details how plastic production and disposal contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions, projecting that by 2050, these emissions could consume 10 to 13 percent of the remaining carbon budget. It identifies four main emission phases: raw material extraction and transport, refining and manufacturing, waste disposal, and the degradation of plastic in the environment. The report emphasizes that current climate models often underestimate these impacts and argues that the only effective solution is an immediate reduction in the production and use of plastics, alongside a halt to new petrochemical infrastructure.

The report details how plastic production and incineration contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions across four life cycle stages: extraction and transport, refining and manufacturing, waste management, and environmental degradation. It projects that by 2050, cumulative emissions could reach over 56 gigatonnes of CO2e, consuming 10% to 13% of the remaining carbon budget. The document concludes that reducing plastic production and use is the only effective way to mitigate these climate impacts.

The document describes the global plastic pollution crisis as a systemic failure driven by increasing production and inadequate waste management. It highlights the environmental and health impacts across land and sea, specifically noting that plastics are projected to account for nearly 20% of total oil consumption and over 10% of the global 1.5°C carbon budget by 2050. The author advocates for a legally binding international framework focusing on reducing production and consumption, eliminating toxic additives, rejecting 'false solutions' like waste-to-energy incineration, and investing in zero waste city models.

The report details how plastic production and incineration contribute significantly to global greenhouse gas emissions across four lifecycle stages: extraction and transport, refining and manufacture, waste management, and environmental degradation. It warns that by 2050, cumulative emissions from plastic could consume 10-13% of the remaining carbon budget, potentially making the 1.5°C climate target impossible to achieve. The document advocates for an immediate reduction in plastic production and the cessation of new petrochemical infrastructure to mitigate these impacts.