Search Climate Insights Directory

The Living Amazon Report 2016 provides a comprehensive overview of the Amazon biome, highlighting its immense biodiversity and critical role in global climate and hydrological regulation. It identifies primary threats including large-scale agriculture, cattle ranching, hydropower dams, and extractive industries, while advocating for a coordinated, biome-wide conservation approach. The report emphasizes the importance of protected areas and indigenous territories, which currently cover over 50% of the biome, and recommends strategies for enhancing climate resilience and securing water connectivity.

The report proposes 'Inclusion of Consumption' (IoC) as a way to ensure carbon prices are reflected in the cost of materials like steel and cement, which are currently shielded by free allowance allocations in emissions trading schemes. By adding a charge to the consumption of these materials based on benchmarks, the IoC aims to incentivize material efficiency and innovation without harming competitiveness. The authors argue that IoC is administratively feasible, compliant with WTO law, and qualifies as an environmental regulation under EU law.

The briefing argues that deep decarbonisation in Europe's energy-intensive industries is technically possible through process, product, and business-model transformations, though it requires strong public policy and funding. It details specific pathways for the chemical sector (bio-based feedstocks and circularity), steel (HIsarna, hydrogen-based DRI, and scrap-EAF production), and cement (calcium looping CCS and clinker substitution). It specifically recommends strengthening the EU ETS Innovation Fund to support the commercialisation of these capital-intensive technologies by 2030.

The document outlines the use of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) to model the impact of the Clean Power Plan and federal tax credits. It specifies adjustments made to standard EIA cost and performance assumptions for various energy technologies, including wind, solar, coal, and nuclear, and defines three primary analysis scenarios: a Reference Case, a Clean Energy Transition Case, and a Clean Power Plan Only Case.

The document outlines technical recommendations for the California Air Resources Board (ARB) on monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) and accounting for CO2 sequestration. It emphasizes the priority of subsurface plume tracking over surface monitoring, argues that only anthropogenic CO2 should be credited, and suggests pragmatic 'haircut' approaches to credit reductions in the event of atmospheric leakage. For EOR applications, it clarifies that recycled CO2 should not require mass balance accounting and stresses the critical importance of wellbore integrity in brownfields.

The report argues that the EU ETS has failed to incentivise emissions reductions in the cement sector, instead acting as a production subsidy for high-carbon clinker. Due to coarse free allocation rules and an inaccurate carbon leakage list, the sector has accumulated significant allowance surpluses, with five major companies receiving nearly €1 billion in free allowances between 2008 and 2014. This has led to 'reverse carbon leakage,' where emissions are imported into the EU through clinker exports. The authors recommend introducing more granular production thresholds for allocation, a tiered system for leakage protection, and additional non-ETS policies to support carbon capture and non-Portland cement innovations.

The document argues that for Germany to be compatible with the Paris Agreement's goals of limiting temperature increase to well below 2°C and aiming for 1.5°C, it must achieve zero CO2 emissions before 2035. This would require a 100% renewable energy mix across all sectors by 2035, a complete phase-out of coal by approximately 2025, and the renovation of 5% of existing buildings annually to nearly zero energy standards.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) utilized the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) to assess the Clean Power Plan. The analysis incorporates modified cost and performance assumptions for various energy technologies, including a rejection of EIA 'learning' curves for mature technologies and specific adjustments for nuclear, coal, and renewables. The study compares four scenarios: a Reference Case, a CPP National Trading Case, a CPP No Trading Case, and a 'Clean Path' Case involving enhanced state-level policies in Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

The document details the use of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) to model energy pathways for Virginia. It outlines specific adjustments made to capital costs, performance projections, and policy assumptions for various electricity generating technologies compared to EIA benchmarks. The analysis compares a 'Reference Case' of existing policies against a 'Clean Path Case' involving Clean Power Plan compliance, mandatory energy efficiency standards, and a Renewable Portfolio Standard for Virginia.

The report defines the bioeconomy as the part of the business sector based on biomass resources, estimating its 2013 value at approximately 5% of Sweden's GDP. It explores four future scenarios for 2050—ranging from global circular welfare to regional self-sufficiency—concluding that while biomass demand will likely increase, sustainable growth requires strong public-private cooperation, investment in biorefineries, and a shift toward circular material flows.

The Paris Agreement establishes a global mandate to hold warming well below 2C and reach net zero emissions in the second half of the century. For businesses, this creates a structural shift in energy, land use, and urban systems, offering trillions of dollars in investment opportunities in renewables and energy efficiency. The report emphasizes the importance of internal carbon pricing for risk management and highlights specific vulnerabilities in sectors like textiles in Bangladesh and agriculture in Ethiopia. It argues that the agreement provides long-term policy certainty, making the transition to a clean economy inevitable and irresistible for the private sector.

The document defines GHG emissions neutrality as achieving net zero anthropogenic GHG emissions from all sectors, primarily through reductions and balancing remaining emissions with removals or negative emissions. It distinguishes this from carbon neutrality, which only addresses carbon dioxide. To limit warming to below 2 degrees C, CO2 emissions must reach net zero between 2060 and 2075, and total GHG emissions between 2080 and 2090. For a 1.5 degrees C limit, CO2 must reach net zero between 2045 and 2050, and total GHGs between 2060 and 2080. Achieving this requires a zero-carbon transformation, including increasing the low-carbon energy share in the electricity sector to over 80 percent by 2050 and phasing out unabated fossil-fuel use this century.

The report analyzes how China's coal power growth was driven by a combination of government capacity targets, stable electricity tariffs, and preferential access to low-cost debt for state-owned enterprises (SOEs). It finds that SOEs have become increasingly financially self-sustaining, using tariff revenues intended for depreciation to fund new capital expenditures, which limits the effectiveness of recent government efforts to constrain coal growth. While macroeconomic shifts and new environmental policies are slowing demand, the report argues that the financial autonomy of SOEs allows them to continue expanding coal assets independently of external policy support.

The document outlines the accounting framework for Landscape 2015, defining climate finance as capital flows for low-carbon and climate-resilient development. It specifies the inclusion of mitigation and adaptation finance, the types of financial instruments tracked, and the distinction between public and private finance. The methodology details the data sources used, such as BNEF and OECD, and provides a comprehensive sectoral breakdown for classifying mitigation and adaptation activities. It also lists the Development Finance Institutions and Climate Funds covered, and defines the regional classifications for the destinations of these financial flows.

The Coal Atlas 2015 examines the systemic damage caused by coal extraction and combustion, highlighting its role as a primary driver of global CO2 emissions and its associated health and human rights violations. It analyzes the economic instability of the 'carbon bubble' and the failure of technologies like carbon capture and storage, while documenting the rise of renewable energy and grassroots protests against the coal industry across various nations, including China, India, the US, Russia, and Germany.

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for protecting biodiversity and mitigating climate change compared to industrial forestry and absolute protection regimes. It highlights that CFM can reduce deforestation rates and enhance carbon storage while securing the rights and livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The document warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the 'financialization of nature,' which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of traditional governance. It recommends that governments recognize collective land tenure and that international frameworks, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, prioritize CFM over traditional Protected Areas to meet conservation goals.

The document advocates for community forest management (CFM) as a superior alternative to industrial logging and strict protection regimes. It asserts that CFM effectively reduces deforestation, protects biodiversity, and supports climate mitigation and adaptation by empowering indigenous peoples and local communities. The text identifies key success factors such as land tenure security and warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims risk land grabbing and the erosion of community control.

The document advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a critical tool for biodiversity conservation and climate mitigation. It presents evidence that CFM often outperforms strict protection regimes in reducing deforestation, particularly when supported by secure land tenure and local autonomy. The briefing highlights the role of CFM in carbon sequestration and climate adaptation, while warning against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialisation of nature, which it claims threaten community rights and traditional governance.

The report advocates for community forest management (CFM) as a superior strategy for environmental conservation and social justice. It provides evidence that forests managed by indigenous peoples and local communities often have lower deforestation rates and higher carbon storage than state-protected areas. The document identifies secure land tenure, local autonomy in decision-making, and strong social capital as critical success factors. It also warns against 'false solutions' like REDD+ and the financialization of nature, which it claims can lead to land grabbing and the erosion of traditional knowledge. The report concludes by recommending that governments prioritize collective land rights and traditional knowledge over market-based conservation mechanisms.

The briefing advocates for Community Forest Management (CFM) as a superior model for forest conservation and climate action compared to industrial logging and state-led protected areas. It highlights CFM's role in carbon storage and biodiversity protection, while warning against market-based mechanisms like REDD+ that may lead to land grabbing. The document recommends that governments recognize communal land tenure and prioritize CFM to meet international biodiversity targets.