Search Climate Insights Directory

The Blue Manifesto argues that EU seas are at a tipping point due to over-exploitation and climate change, proposing an 'Ocean Deal' framework, a dedicated 'Ocean Fund', and the appointment of an Ocean Commissioner to ensure policy coherence. The document outlines a detailed timeline of sectoral policy asks through 2029, including bans on bottom trawling in Marine Protected Areas, the phase-out of offshore oil and gas exploration, and the elimination of environmentally harmful subsidies by 2027.

The analysis finds that complying with revised Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) is technically achievable for SaskPower without jeopardizing grid reliability. While the Saskatchewan government previously claimed rates would double by 2035, this modelling indicates that residential electricity rates would only increase by 6–9% relative to a baseline scenario. The CER would significantly reduce cumulative greenhouse gas emissions between 2025 and 2050 by accelerating the adoption of carbon capture and storage and increasing imports of clean electricity from Manitoba.

The report concludes that Saskatchewan can comply with a revised version of the federal Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) without compromising grid reliability and with only a marginal increase in residential electricity rates (6% to 9% by 2035) compared to SaskPower's reference scenario. Using the COPPER model, the analysis shows that while the CER would require additional capital investments of $4 billion to $6.5 billion by 2035, it would significantly reduce cumulative greenhouse gas emissions between 2025 and 2050 compared to the province's current plans. The report emphasizes the central role of wind power and the importance of federal investment tax credits in maintaining affordability during the transition to net-zero electricity by 2050.

Reclaim Finance argues that the current SFDR framework is too vague, leading to confusion and greenwashing. It proposes three key reforms: excluding fossil fuel developers from funds making environmental or social claims, establishing minimum quality requirements for 'green', 'transition', and 'impact' funds, and aligning transparency obligations (PAIs) with advisory processes (MiFID II and IDD) to better reflect investor preferences.

The report categorizes hydrogen applications into 'high-value' (primarily chemical feedstocks) and 'low-value' (primarily energy provision), arguing that the latter are often outcompeted by direct electrification. It warns that without strict guardrails on production, electrolytic hydrogen could increase net greenhouse gas emissions. The author recommends focusing infrastructure on tight industrial clusters and utilizing demand-side policies like advance market commitments and contracts for difference to scale high-value uses while minimizing risks in low-value sectors.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) asserts that synthetic sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is a critical component for aviation decarbonization and qualifies for section 45Z credits. CATF analysis suggests that by mid-century, global aviation energy demand could be double the projected biofuel supply, with synthetic SAF potentially meeting up to 56% of aviation demand in some scenarios. The document argues that synthetic SAF fits the section 45Z definitions of both "transportation fuel" and "sustainable aviation fuel" because it is suitable for aircraft, meets carbon intensity requirements, does not involve the prohibited co-processing of applicable materials with non-biomass feedstocks, and adheres to ASTM International standards without being derived from petroleum or palm fatty acid distillates.

The UK has met previous emissions targets primarily through the energy supply sector, but currently lacks credible plans for two-thirds of the reductions needed to reach its 2030 target of a 68% reduction compared to 1990 levels. To address this, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) emphasizes that over 75% of future reductions must come from non-energy sectors, specifically transport, buildings, agriculture, and land. Key recommendations include accelerating the scale-up of methane-suppressing feed, deploying 5 MtCO2 of engineered greenhouse gas removals annually by 2030, and prioritizing low-carbon hydrogen for industrial use-cases like steel and ammonia production rather than home heating. In aviation, while a SAF mandate is planned for 2025 to reach a 10% target by 2030, the brief warns against overreliance on SAF due to feedstock constraints and suggests exploring e-fuels and hydrogen. Nuclear energy is identified as a long-term necessity, requiring a shift toward standardised products to reduce costs.

The report examines Indonesia's energy transition, highlighting the risk of stranded assets due to coal overcapacity and the potential for renewable energy to revitalize coal-dependent provinces. It compares the RUPTL 2021-2030 and JETP frameworks, suggesting that replacing planned coal capacity with solar power in regions like East Kalimantan, South Kalimantan, and South Sumatra could create 96,000 high-skilled jobs and attract $9.4 billion in investment.

The report compares a pathway aligned with U.S. climate commitments against the energy and climate provisions of Project 2025. It finds that Continued Climate Leadership would lead to significant emissions reductions, job growth, and public health improvements, while Project 2025 would increase emissions, reduce GDP, and cause additional premature deaths.

The report identifies Drax power station as the UK's largest single CO2 emitter in 2023, emitting 11.5 million tonnes of CO2. It highlights that power stations, steelworks, and refineries are the primary sources of emissions, with the power sector accounting for 12% of total UK emissions. The document criticizes the use of biomass for power generation, arguing that the assumption of carbon neutrality is flawed and that the sector's reliance on imports creates energy security risks. It suggests that energy security can be achieved through the rapid deployment of cheaper renewables, energy storage, and grid upgrades rather than through subsidies for large emitters.

The document argues that Section 45Z should prioritize low-carbon aviation fuels and avoid over-subsidizing biofuels with high indirect emissions. It recommends modifying the GREET model to align with CORSIA standards for indirect land use change (ILUC) and cautions against using negative emissions values or fugitive methane from oil and gas as feedstocks. Additionally, it advocates for the eligibility of synthetic sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and the independent application of tax credits across the fuel value chain.

The report finds that Alberta can almost completely decarbonize its electricity generation within the next decade using wind, solar, and gas with carbon capture. While federal Clean Electricity Regulations are a point of political contention, modelling suggests they have little impact on the long-term supply mix compared to the massive projected growth in electricity demand driven by industrial electrification. The transition's success depends on scaling up transmission infrastructure and maintaining policy stability to attract private investment.

The report concludes that Alberta has the natural resources and capacity to decarbonize its electricity production almost completely within the next decade. It highlights a transition dominated by wind, solar, and natural gas with carbon capture and storage (CCS), while noting that the primary challenge is not land availability but the expansion of transmission infrastructure to meet a potentially doubling demand for electricity driven by industrial electrification.

The report presents the Industrial Zero Emissions Calculator (IZEC), an open-source Excel tool that allows stakeholders to visualize the electricity, hydrogen, bioenergy, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) needs required to achieve zero-emission industry. Focusing on U.S. scenario results, the report argues that direct electrification is the most energy-efficient pathway for industrial heat, while green hydrogen should be reserved for high-value feedstocks and steelmaking due to its inefficiency when burned. It highlights that heavy reliance on bioenergy or fossil-based CCS leads to prohibitive land use or capital costs, respectively. The authors emphasize that combining these technologies with energy and material efficiency improvements is critical to making industrial decarbonization feasible and cost-effective.

The report provides a 'Bank of Evidence' detailing the failures and risks of geoengineering, categorized into carbon removal and solar radiation management. It highlights specific project failures in carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Australia, the UAE, and Canada, and critiques the ecological risks of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air capture (DAC). The document also examines speculative solar radiation management (SRM) experiments in the US, UK, and Mexico, and various marine geoengineering attempts, asserting that these 'false solutions' often benefit the fossil fuel industry while threatening biodiversity and human rights.

The report documents the negative impacts and risks associated with various geoengineering 'false solutions,' including carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), direct air capture (DAC), solar radiation management (SRM), and marine geoengineering. It provides specific examples of project failures, environmental hazards, and social injustices across Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and Latin America, asserting that these technologies often perpetuate the fossil fuel economy rather than solving the climate crisis.

The document provides a comprehensive critique of geoengineering, categorizing it into carbon removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM). It details specific failures and risks of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS/CCUS), Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), Direct Air Capture (DAC), and marine geoengineering across various global regions, emphasizing that these 'false solutions' often facilitate continued fossil fuel extraction through Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) and pose significant ecological and social threats.

The report finds that while international public finance for fossil fuels from CETP signatories has decreased significantly, there has not been a corresponding increase in clean energy finance. Many signatories lack quantitative targets or comprehensive policies to prioritize clean energy, and some high-income countries continue to violate the pledge by financing fossil fuel projects.

The report analyzes 13 large-scale CCS projects across various industries, including natural gas processing, hydrogen production, power generation, steel, and cement. It finds that while many projects have met high technical standards, others have faced significant operational hurdles, often due to a lack of climate-focused incentives or unexpected geological challenges. The document argues that transparent reporting and robust climate-driven policies are essential to ensure future projects maximize their emissions reduction potential.

The report summarizes a survey of 699 CDR researchers, finding that while experts predict multi-gigaton-scale removal by 2050, they identify market costs and policy gaps as primary barriers. Bioenergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and forest-based methods are expected to provide the largest shares of removal by 2075, with forest-based removal being the most cost-effective. Despite predicting a need for over 12 Gt of CDR to reach net-zero by 2075, respondents project actual removal levels to be significantly lower, suggesting a gap between necessity and expected implementation.