Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that allowing African exporters to use Article 6 carbon credits to reduce their EU CBAM liabilities would address equity concerns, retain climate finance within Africa, and provide policy flexibility. It notes that current CBAM regulations only permit deductions for explicit carbon prices (taxes or ETS), making Article 6 credits ineligible. The document highlights the significant economic risks CBAM poses to African GDP and the specific challenges African nations face in implementing traditional carbon pricing due to their emissions profiles and administrative constraints. It concludes with recommendations for the EU to amend its regulations to include high-integrity international credits, specifically those from Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Africa, to align with the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC).

The document analyzes the transition of rice methane avoidance credits following a massive invalidation of projects in 2024. It evaluates new methodologies from Verra, Gold Standard, and CAR, identifying key risks in additionality, baselines, and MRV while providing mitigation strategies for buyers and developers.

The document analyzes ODS destruction projects, which provide high-impact carbon credits by permanently eliminating potent greenhouse gases like CFCs. While these projects are considered highly additional and have high retirement rates, they face scaling challenges due to a lack of destruction facilities in developing countries and complex transboundary regulations. Key quality risks involve the monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) of the chain of custody and baseline leakage assumptions, though these are generally well-mitigated by existing methodologies.

The Carbon Crediting Data Framework (CCDF) is a four-part toolkit (executive report, implementation spreadsheet, technical documentation, and JSON schema) created by RMI's Carbon Markets Initiative to address data fragmentation in the voluntary carbon market (VCM). The framework synthesizes requirements from over 160 sources to provide a common language for 570 individual data fields across 22 categories and 48 sub-categories. It organizes data into four tiers based on the project lifecycle: Pre-Registration (Tier 0), Validation (Tier 1), Verification (Tier 2), and Innovation & Ambition (Tier 3). The CCDF specifically integrates socio-environmental (SE) data as core benefits rather than optional add-ons, drawing on standards from international finance institutions and the UN. Early implementation by Centigrade demonstrates that the framework can reduce due diligence time and transaction costs, which can otherwise exceed $100,000 per project. RMI is also using the CCDF to support the Carbon Data Open Protocol (CDOP) in developing a unified VCM data schema.

Carbon Market Watch (CMW) opposes the UK government's proposed reliance on market-based mechanisms and the VCMI Scope 3 Action Code of Practice, arguing that allowing carbon credits to 'close scope 3 emissions gaps' effectively legitimises offsetting and risks rewarding 'climate laggards'. CMW advocates for a 'contribution' or 'beyond value chain mitigation' (BVCM) model over offsetting and insetting, and suggests that the UK's Environmental Reporting Guidelines (ERG) should mandate, rather than encourage, the disclosure of carbon credit information. The document also recommends 'temperature-alignment claims' (specifically referencing 1.5°C) as a more precise alternative to 'Paris alignment' claims.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025 calls for an end to 'creative accounting' and the reliance on voluntary frameworks in corporate climate action. It emphasizes that government regulation must become the 'backbone of climate action' to ensure that big tech, fast fashion, automotive, and agrifood companies implement substantiated emission reductions rather than relying on misleading carbon neutrality claims based on carbon credits.

The KaF-Wild project is a 60-month initiative in Zambia's Lower Kafue Basin designed to secure biodiversity and promote socio-economic benefits. It focuses on four main components: strengthening institutional and legal frameworks for wildlife conservation, improving coexistence between people and wildlife in protected habitats, diversifying wildlife conservation financing, and enhancing communications and knowledge management. The project targets the restoration of 3,000 hectares of wetland and the improved management of 622,900 hectares of protected areas, including Blue Lagoon and Lochinvar National Parks. It specifically addresses threats such as poaching, human-wildlife conflict, and the spread of invasive Mimosa pigra. The project is implemented in coordination with a sister project, KaF-Adapt, and is supported by a total GEF financing of $6,503,167, including agency fees.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the proposed CLEAR Methodology for Cooking Energy Transitions contains shortcomings and optionalities that risk overcrediting. The organization recommends replacing arbitrary downward adjustments for the Hawthorne effect with scientific evidence, adopting a conservative 4:1 wood-to-charcoal conversion factor, and implementing the annual downward baseline adjustments required by the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) Standard. Additionally, it suggests increasing the default leakage adjustment factor to 5%, updating fraction of non-renewable biomass (fNRB) values more frequently, and strengthening additionality testing by lowering the common practice threshold to 20%.

The report introduces a nine-step roadmap for mCDR companies to establish robust MRV systems, emphasizing the integration of direct measurements and modeling to quantify carbon removal. It outlines the organizational steps from initial strategy development to industry knowledge sharing, while highlighting the interdependence of MRV with engineering, permitting, and community engagement.

The report evaluates the Article 6 carbon market rules finalized at COP29. It finds that Article 6.2 provides a weak, decentralized framework with significant loopholes in additionality, permanence, and accountability. Article 6.4 is rated more robust due to its centralized Supervisory Body and structured transparency, though it still lacks sufficient safeguards for land rights and permanence. The author argues that the current framework is not robust enough to ensure high-quality carbon credits and warns developed countries against using these markets to meet their NDCs.

The report introduces the National Integrated Clean Cooking Planning (NICCP) for Rwanda, utilizing the Integrated Clean Cooking Planning Tool (ICCPT) and a financial model to assess paths toward clean cooking access. It compares two scenarios: the 'Aligned' plan, which follows current government ambitions, and the 'CleanStep' plan, which prioritizes rapid adoption by 2029 followed by economic recovery. Key findings indicate that while infrastructure deployment is necessary, affordability gaps—particularly in rural areas—remain a primary barrier. The CleanStep plan achieves higher adoption and better environmental outcomes by 2029, while the Aligned plan shows better health outcomes and lower long-term funding requirements by 2034. Both plans emphasize the potential of carbon credits and the need for combined pricing measures (subsidies on both appliances and fuels) to ensure sustainable transitions.

The report finds that current EU ETS cap trajectories are more ambitious than required by most climate neutrality scenarios, potentially leading to severe allowance shortages and price spikes after 2035. It evaluates several reform options to balance supply and demand, including adjusting the linear reduction factor (LRF), reforming the Market Stability Reserve (MSR), and integrating carbon dioxide removals (CDRs). The authors warn against the inclusion of Article 6 international credits due to risks to environmental integrity and the potential for market collapse. Recommended solutions include a combination of MSR replenishment and technological CDRs or a phased reduction of the LRF post-2035.

The document argues that despite the COP 28 agreement to transition away from fossil fuels, production and consumption continue to rise. It proposes that COP 30 adopt differentiated timelines for phasing out fossil fuels based on national wealth and historical responsibility, and calls for an immediate end to new fossil fuel exploration and expansion. Key financial recommendations include ending public financing for fossil fuels, reforming subsidies, and establishing the Belém Action Mechanism for Just Transition to coordinate climate finance.

The report analyzes organic waste management models in Indonesia and Brazil, finding that decentralized, community-based, and household-level systems often offer greater cost-efficiency (lower Levelized Cost of Waste Management) than large-scale centralized projects. While private operators achieve economies of scale, community groups face severe financial pressure due to low operational margins and reliance on short-lived assets. The study recommends holistic policy approaches, legal recognition for informal workers, and the integration of co-benefits like job creation and methane reduction to attract more diverse funding, such as green bonds and carbon credits.

The report analyzes organic waste management models in Indonesia and Brazil, finding that decentralized, community-based, and informal models often exhibit greater cost efficiency and lower levelized costs of waste management (LCOW) compared to large-scale industrial projects. While labor remains the primary operational expense across all models, decentralized systems face significant financial strain due to low operating margins and reliance on short-lived assets. The study recommends a holistic approach that integrates waste management with health and climate goals, provides legal certainty for informal workers, and implements transparent monitoring systems to unlock diverse financing sources.

The report finds that the tech sector is facing a "climate strategy crisis" as soaring energy demands from AI and the use of outdated market-based accounting methodologies undermine the integrity of corporate climate targets. While some companies like Google and Microsoft are pioneering 24/7 hourly renewable electricity matching, others like Amazon and Meta advocate for looser accounting rules through the Emissions First Partnership. The analysis reveals that absolute location-based emissions for all five companies increased from 2019 to 2023, and critical transitions—such as decarbonising third-party data centres and hardware supply chains—remain largely neglected or poorly reported.

The document argues that despite the COP 28 agreement to transition away from fossil fuels, production continues to rise, led by wealthy nations. It calls for COP 30 to establish differentiated phase-out timelines based on historical responsibility, mandate annual progress reports, and launch the Belém Action Mechanism for Just Transition. The briefing emphasizes that the transition is economically feasible if Global North countries redirect fossil fuel subsidies and tax polluters to mobilize over USD 5,000 billion annually for climate finance, prioritizing grants over loans to avoid exacerbating debt in the Global South.

Farm to Feed addresses food waste in Kenya by purchasing surplus and imperfect produce from farmers and selling it to B2B customers or donating it to schools. Supported by FSD Africa's Catalyst Fund, the company has scaled its network from 300 to 6,000 farmers, resulting in a 41% increase in farmer incomes and the prevention of 1,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions by saving 920,000 kg of food.

The report argues that ASEAN's data centre industry requires a more diverse range of corporate renewable procurement options and stronger national sustainability frameworks to ensure sustainable growth. It evaluates various mechanisms—such as Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), green tariffs, and Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)—noting that limited availability of these options, particularly in countries like Indonesia, hinders investment. The text emphasizes that national frameworks are essential for managing energy transition risks and improving data transparency, as international standards are not always tailored to regional needs.

The report highlights that data centres in ASEAN could account for 2% to 30% of national power demand by 2030, risking a significant increase in emissions, particularly in Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. It argues that approximately 30% of this demand can be met by solar and wind via grids without battery storage. The document advocates for more accessible corporate Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), national sustainability frameworks, and advanced cooling technologies to ensure the sector's growth does not derail regional decarbonisation targets.