Search Climate Insights Directory

The Great Lakes region remains the heartland of US steelmaking, but its primary production assets face a critical transition to avoid becoming noncompetitive as global demand for low-emissions steel grows. While federal legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides significant funding and tax credits (such as 45V and 45Q), the report finds a lack of coordinated state-level industrial strategies. The document argues that the region must prioritize the adoption of Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) pathways—specifically those using renewable hydrogen or carbon capture—to maintain high-quality jobs and reduce local air pollution. Key bottlenecks include grid interconnection delays for renewable energy, the need for Class VI primacy for carbon sequestration, and a lack of steel-specific workforce retraining programs.

The briefing outlines five recommendations to enhance the Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA) to meet Europe's climate goals, focusing on increasing CO2 storage capacity, creating an EU-level aggregation platform for CO2 markets, improving Member State mapping of storage potential, leveraging oil and gas sector resources, and accelerating infrastructure permitting.

The report argues that a carbon price exceeding US$ 20 per ton of CO2 captured would make forest restoration more profitable than cattle ranching across most of the Brazilian Amazon. This mechanism could capture 16 Gt CO2 through restoration and avoid 32 Gt CO2 from deforestation over 30 years, totaling 48 Gt CO2. The study uses a dynamic spatial model to show that such payments would generate US$ 320 billion in revenue, preventing the forest from reaching a tipping point and transforming the region from a net carbon emitter to a carbon sink.

The report identifies the oil and gas sector as the primary obstacle to Canada's 2030 climate targets due to rising emissions. It proposes four complementary policies: strict methane regulations, targeted public support for carbon capture and storage (CCS), an emissions cap for the sector, and a government-backed transition investment taxonomy. The author emphasizes that explicitly addressing regional equity is essential for the political durability and success of these climate policies.

The Canadian Climate Institute proposes a four-part policy framework to decarbonize Canada's oil and gas sector while addressing regional fairness. The sector is identified as Canada's largest and fastest-growing source of emissions, contributing 189 Mt of greenhouse gases in 2021 (28% of the national total). To balance climate targets with economic stability, the report recommends stringent methane regulations, targeted public support for carbon capture and storage (CCS), a sector-specific emissions cap, and a government-backed transition investment taxonomy. This approach aims to ensure that oil and gas-producing regions contribute their fair share of reductions while protecting the trade balance and mitigating the risk of stranded assets as global demand for fossil fuels declines.

The statement argues that climate-altering engineering technologies, such as carbon capture and storage and solar radiation modification, are unproven at scale and pose significant risks to human rights and the environment. It further contends that decarbonization proposals often fail to address the toxic impacts of industrial agriculture and that the only viable pathway to avoid catastrophic climate change is the immediate phase-out of fossil fuels combined with a human-rights-respecting transition to renewable energy.

The briefing evaluates 16 countries against 1.5°C-aligned power sector benchmarks, finding that no assessed country is fully on track. It argues for a global phase-out of coal and fossil gas by 2040, noting that while some countries are making progress on coal, there is a critical lack of explicit fossil gas phase-out plans and insufficient renewable energy acceleration globally.

The study analyzes IPCC Sixth Assessment Report mitigation scenarios to determine the speed and trajectory of fossil fuel reductions necessary to limit warming to 2 °C or below. It finds that pathways allowing for higher gas emissions rely heavily on carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which may be unrealistic due to poor model representation of storage capacity and technology diffusion. Consequently, the authors argue for the establishment of clear production and use benchmarks for coal, oil, and gas.

The document argues that CCS costs remain persistently high due to design complexity and a high need for customization, which prevents the technology from achieving the experience rates and economies of scale seen in renewable energy. In Canada, actual project costs often exceed modelled estimates, and the technology's viability in the oil and gas sector relies heavily on ongoing government subsidies. While CCS may be useful for hard-to-decarbonize industries like cement, the brief suggests it is an inefficient use of public funds for the oil and gas sector compared to alternatives like methane reduction and electrification.

A survey of 58 European climate experts reveals skepticism about Europe's ability to meet its 2030 and 2050 climate goals, citing lagging investments and bureaucratic hurdles. While experts show varying confidence in technologies like CCS and hydrogen, there is a notable call for a more prominent role for nuclear energy and a shift toward 'technology optionality' and simplified, incentive-based policymaking.

The report concludes that while the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) remains the primary driver for industrial decarbonisation, current carbon prices alone are insufficient to trigger the massive investments required for deep decarbonisation in the steel and cement sectors. It argues that demand-side measures—specifically Green Public Procurement (GPP) and sustainable product regulations—can provide the necessary market signals to build technological capacity and avoid carbon lock-in. The study highlights that government-driven initiatives have significantly more potential than voluntary industry pledges, though the latter can serve as a short-term bridge. Key recommendations include harmonising low-carbon product definitions across EU Member States and exploring Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfDs) to bridge the 'green premium' cost gap.

The report identifies a 'planning gap' in Europe's trajectory toward 2050 climate neutrality and proposes that the updated National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) be transformed into comprehensive roadmaps. It recommends that Member States move beyond a narrow focus on renewables to include a diverse portfolio of clean firm energy (advanced nuclear, superhot rock geothermal), carbon capture and storage (CCS), and zero-carbon fuels. The authors emphasize the need for robust energy system modelling, cross-border infrastructure coordination, and the implementation of financial mechanisms like Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfD) to attract investment. Additionally, the report calls for a focused strategy to reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas supply chain and the creation of a net-zero implementation tracker to ensure accountability.

The document asserts that current exponential growth in plastic production is incompatible with global climate goals, as plastics already account for 3% to 8% of global GHG emissions and could consume over 10% of the remaining carbon budget by 2050. It argues that emissions cannot be decoupled from production through electrification or bio-based feedstocks alone. To address this, the brief recommends that the plastics treaty establish a global production baseline, a freeze on production levels, and a phasedown schedule to reduce production by 46% to 70% from 2019 levels by 2050. It further calls for a ban on new production infrastructure, the elimination of public subsidies, and the implementation of trade restrictions to prevent carbon leakage.

The cement industry accounts for approximately 7% of global CO2 emissions and faces significant barriers to decarbonisation due to high capital intensity and the nature of process emissions. The report argues that achieving net-zero by 2050 requires a combination of technological shifts—such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), alternative binders, and fuel substitution—and robust policy support. Key policy recommendations include the implementation of carbon contracts for difference (CCfDs), green public procurement, and carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs) to prevent carbon leakage. Financial investment needs are estimated to reach USD 70 billion annually between 2030 and 2040, which the report suggests could be unlocked through the sustainable debt market and science-based certification standards.

The report establishes a framework for assessing temporary carbon storage, asserting that because CO2 emissions have effectively permanent impacts, storage lasting only decades or a century cannot offset emissions without risking higher long-term temperatures. It argues that economic equivalence claims are irrelevant to the physical targets of the Paris Agreement and suggests a minimum storage requirement of 100 years based on the precautionary principle and current global emissions trajectories.

The report concludes that all analyzed policy frameworks are inadequate for the robust deployment of carbon dioxide removals (CDR). Most frameworks fail to establish a clear firewall between emissions reductions and removals, often treating them as interchangeable through offsetting mechanisms. Key deficiencies include the absence of legally binding, separate CDR targets, the lack of a robust definition of CDR that ensures long-term permanence, and insufficient monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems. The authors recommend that CDR be strictly defined as a secondary climate function to balance residual emissions, supported by dedicated legal targets and rigorous accounting to prevent 'mitigation deterrence'.

The document defines mass timber as a class of engineered wood materials, such as cross-laminated timber, capable of supporting large structures. It highlights benefits including carbon storage, a potential 13% to 26.5% reduction in building material emissions, and wildfire risk mitigation through the removal of small-diameter trees. The text also details U.S. federal support via the USDA Wood Innovations Program and the 2018 Farm Bill, while addressing concerns regarding fire safety and moisture management.

The report finds that oil- and gas-fired power plants in development increased by 13% in the last year to 783 GW, with Asia accounting for nearly two-thirds of this capacity. If built, these projects would cost an estimated US$611 billion and generate 41,239 million tonnes of CO2e lifetime emissions. The analysis highlights that China leads global development, while the United States possesses the largest existing capacity. The report further challenges the reliability of fossil fuels during extreme weather and notes that renewables with storage are now cheaper than gas-fired power in many regions, including China.

The document analyzes the persistent high costs of carbon capture and storage (CCS), particularly within the Canadian oil and gas sector. It argues that high design complexity and the need for customization prevent the cost reductions seen in renewable technologies like solar and wind. While CCS may be vital for hard-to-abate sectors like cement, the brief concludes that public investment in CCS for oil and gas is risky and inefficient.

The report finds that TotalEnergies' 2030 oil and gas production targets and carbon intensity are significantly higher than those required by the IEA's 1.5°C-aligned Net Zero Emissions (NZE) scenario. It highlights a substantial investment gap, noting that in 2022, the company invested more than three dollars in oil and gas for every dollar invested in its Integrated Gas, Renewables and Power division, while distributing over four dollars to shareholders for every dollar invested in that same division. The analysis concludes that the company's reliance on carbon capture and offsets, combined with continued expansion into unconventional resources like Arctic and ultra-deep water, poses a material risk to its ability to meet decarbonization targets.