Search Climate Insights Directory

A group of German youth successfully challenged the Federal Climate Protection Act, leading the Federal Constitutional Court to rule that the law violated fundamental rights by failing to specify sufficient emission cuts beyond 2030.

The document highlights the critical role of the steel industry in both global infrastructure and greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that the sector can be almost completely decarbonised by 2050 through appropriate policies and investments.

The report analyzes the link between income inequality and carbon emissions, projecting that by 2030, the richest 10% of the global population will still be responsible for nearly half of all consumption emissions (48%), while the bottom 50% will account for only 10%. It highlights that the net effect of current NDCs results in 2030 global emissions remaining roughly equal to 2015 levels (35.5 GtCO2), which is nearly double the 18 GtCO2 median estimate required to limit warming to 1.5°C.

The document asserts that plastic is fundamentally carbon and cannot be part of a climate solution, as its production and incineration are projected to consume up to 13% of the global carbon budget for a 1.5°C limit. It systematically refutes five industry claims regarding emissions-free production, carbon-free fuel, carbon sinks, offset schemes, and bioplastics, concluding that these narratives divert policymakers from the necessary goal of reducing plastic production.

The report argues that current financial investments in the gas value chain underestimate climate risks and are incompatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. It highlights that while many development finance institutions (DFIs) and private asset managers have moved away from coal, they continue to fund new gas projects despite the availability of cheaper renewable alternatives and the risk of high-emission lock-in. The document asserts that gas should not be considered a bridge or transition fuel and calls for clear strategies to phase out fossil fuel support.

The authors find that the emissions commitment of current primary steel equipment is 21 Gt CO2eq, which is significantly lower than previous estimates of 52–65 Gt CO2eq. This suggests that future emissions are driven by the speed of novel technology and renewable energy deployment, rather than the long economic life of existing capital. The authors recommend improved monitoring of asset age and research into regulating emission-intensive equipment to avoid consuming the remaining carbon budget.

The report argues that the food industry's reliance on single-use plastics creates significant ecological and health crises while exposing the sector and its financiers to material financial risks. It highlights a 'financial bubble' in the plastics industry driven by overproduction and impending regulation. Research reveals that seven banks operating in Belgium provided over 78 billion euros in financing to nine food industry companies between 2015 and 2021, with Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas, and ING as the primary financiers. The document calls for banks to implement concrete plastic policies and for the Belgian government to use its influence as a shareholder to drive a transition toward a circular economy.

The document assesses the proliferation of gas power plants, pipelines, and LNG terminals across East, South, and Southeast Asia. It contends that these investments, totaling $380 billion, risk becoming stranded assets as renewable energy costs plummet and climate targets necessitate a rapid shift away from fossil fuels. The report highlights the significant carbon budget impact of these projects and the continued role of public finance in supporting gas expansion despite net-zero pledges.

The report analyzes the planned expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia, including power plants, pipelines, and LNG terminals, totaling $379 billion. It argues that this expansion risks locking in high greenhouse gas emissions, potentially consuming a quarter of the global carbon budget for a 1.5°C limit. The document highlights that falling costs of renewable energy and high price volatility of LNG make these gas investments economically risky and likely to become stranded assets. It further criticizes the continued support of public financial institutions for gas projects and advocates for a transition to clean energy portfolios.

The report analyzes plans for US$379 billion in new gas infrastructure across Asia, including 320 GW of power plants and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity. It argues that this expansion would consume a quarter of the global carbon budget for a 1.5°C limit and warns that these assets may become economically unviable due to the falling cost of renewables and LNG price volatility. The author calls for a redirection of public finance away from gas to align with net-zero goals.

The report argues that the planned $379 billion expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia threatens the global goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C and risks creating stranded assets. It highlights that the region is planning 320 GW of new gas-fired power and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity, which could emit up to 117 Gt CO2-eq over their lifespans. The document contends that renewable energy is now a more cost-effective and reliable alternative, and calls for the redirection of public finance away from gas to support net-zero goals.

The report identifies a massive planned expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia, including 320 GW of power plants and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity, valued at 379 billion USD. It argues these investments risk becoming stranded assets as renewable energy costs plummet and climate targets necessitate a rapid decline in fossil fuel use. The document highlights that the projected emissions from this infrastructure could consume 25% of the remaining global carbon budget for 1.5°C. It further criticizes the continued role of public financial institutions in funding these projects, suggesting a shift toward clean energy portfolios as a more secure and sustainable alternative.

The report argues that the planned $379 billion investment in Asian gas infrastructure is an economically risky and environmentally damaging strategy that threatens the global goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C. It highlights that the scale of planned LNG import capacity in Asia could absorb more than the entire 2020 global LNG trade volume, potentially locking in high emissions for decades. The document contends that renewable energy portfolios, combined with storage and demand-side management, are now more cost-effective and reliable alternatives to gas, rendering new gas projects likely to become stranded assets. It further criticizes the continued role of public financial institutions in funding these projects, urging a shift toward net-zero aligned investments.

The report analyzes the expansion of gas power plants, pipelines, and LNG terminals across East, South, and Southeast Asia, totaling $379 billion in planned investments. It argues that this expansion is incompatible with the 1.5°C climate goal, as the resulting emissions could consume 25% of the global carbon budget. The document highlights the economic risk of these projects becoming stranded assets due to the falling cost of renewable energy and the volatility of LNG prices. It concludes that clean energy portfolios, combining renewables with storage and demand management, are more cost-effective and secure alternatives to gas.

The report identifies a massive planned expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia, totaling US$379 billion, which includes 320 GW of power plants, 63,000 km of pipelines, and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity. It argues that this expansion would consume approximately one-quarter of the global carbon budget required to limit warming to 1.5°C and warns that these projects are economically risky compared to cheaper renewable alternatives. The document highlights the role of public financing from institutions like the Export-Import Bank of China and the Asian Development Bank in sustaining this growth, while urging a shift toward clean energy portfolios.

The document argues that to limit global warming to 1.5°C, all coal assets must be closed by 2030 in OECD and European countries and by 2040 globally. It outlines a comprehensive framework for financial institutions to phase out coal support, combining immediate exclusion criteria for new projects and high-exposure companies with a structured engagement process for remaining portfolio companies to ensure the actual closure, rather than the sale, of coal assets.

The report analyzes the European Central Bank's (ECB) corporate asset purchases during the Covid-19 pandemic, specifically under the Corporate Sector Purchase Program (CSPP) and the Pandemic Emergency Purchase Program (PEPP). It finds that the ECB increased its holdings of bonds from five oil and gas majors—Shell, TotalEnergies, Repsol, Eni, and OMV—between April 2020 and September 2021. The author argues that these companies' investment plans are incompatible with 1.5C or 2C warming limits, as they continue to expand fossil fuel production and invest in liquified natural gas (LNG) and unconventional sources. The report criticizes the ECB's July 2021 climate roadmap for being 'dangerously imprecise' and for delaying the implementation of climate criteria for asset purchases until 2023. It concludes that the ECB must immediately exclude fossil fuel developers from its corporate purchases and collateral framework to avoid supporting 'stranded' assets and systemic climate risk.

The document warns investors against chemical recycling due to high energy intensity and technical failures, while recommending separate collection (specifically reverse vending machines) and reuse-and-refill systems as high-growth, low-risk opportunities driven by regulatory shifts and consumer demand.

The paper surveys 29 long-term climate strategies (LTSs) submitted to the UNFCCC, representing 42 countries and 28% of global emissions. It finds a growing trend toward net-zero targets, an increasing focus on the fundamental economic and societal shifts required for transition, and a reliance on both natural and technological carbon removals. The analysis highlights that while most strategies include midcentury goals and modeling, the level of detail regarding adaptation and just transition varies, and some parties acknowledge gaps between their most ambitious scenarios and their final targets.

The study finds that new coal generation is unnecessary for energy security, more expensive than renewable alternatives, and incompatible with the Paris Agreement. Modelling shows that forcing 1.5 GW of new coal into the power system increases total discounted costs by R23 billion in a reference scenario and R109 billion in a climate policy scenario, while reducing GDP and employment.