Search Climate Insights Directory

The document provides the technical appendices for the 2021 Production Gap report, outlining the data sources and calculations used to determine the discrepancy between planned fossil fuel production and climate-consistent levels. It describes the 'countries’ plans and projections' (CPP) pathway, which aggregates data from 15 major producer countries and scales it globally using IEA STEPS. It also details the selection of 1.5°C and 2°C consistent pathways from the IPCC SR1.5 database, applying specific constraints on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. Finally, it compares the 2021 findings with the 2019 assessment, noting that the overall production gap remains largely unchanged despite minor declines in coal and oil projections.

The policy brief argues that carbon capture is a bipartisan avenue for climate action and proposes seven priorities: optimizing the 45Q tax credit, investing in CO2 transport and storage infrastructure, expanding the Department of Energy's mission, decarbonizing hard-to-abate industries, scaling up low-carbon hydrogen, establishing leadership in carbon removal, and aligning capital flows with innovation needs.

The policy brief contends that relying on carbon offsets to meet climate targets is risky and unsustainable due to issues with environmental integrity and the risk of 'double counting' under the Paris Agreement. It argues that offsets can displace domestic climate action and mask the scale of the climate crisis by offering a cheap alternative to deep sectoral transformation. To address these failures, the document proposes shifting from a 'compensation' model to a 'contribution' model, where companies fund host country climate efforts without claiming carbon neutrality. Additionally, it suggests 'practice-based credits' that reward the implementation of sustainable practices rather than quantified results, which is particularly useful for land-use projects where permanence is difficult to guarantee. The brief emphasizes that these alternatives better align with sustainable development goals and protect companies from reputational risks associated with fraudulent offsetting claims.

The Climate Action Tracker (CAT) reports that a wave of net zero pledges from 127 countries could reduce projected warming by 2100 to as low as 2.1°C. However, current policies still put the world on a trajectory of 2.9°C, and a significant emissions gap remains for 2030.

The World Resources Institute outlines ten priorities for President Biden to address the climate crisis, centered on the principles of inclusive prosperity, focusing on carbon-heavy sectors, and supporting subnational action. Key recommendations include committing to a 45-50% emissions reduction by 2030, passing a $2 trillion climate-smart stimulus package, and phasing out new passenger vehicle sales of polluting cars by 2035. The plan emphasizes a 'whole-of-government' approach combining standards, investments, carbon pricing, and environmental justice to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

The report identifies a rapid increase in net-zero pledges globally, noting that as of October 2020, these targets cover 826 cities, 103 regions, and 1,565 companies. It argues that the actual ambition of these pledges is often obscured by ambiguous implementation approaches—specifically regarding emission reductions, offsetting, and carbon dioxide removal—and advocates for greater transparency to ensure targets lead to deep decarbonisation.

An open letter from Bellona Europa, Carbon Market Watch, and Fern arguing against the European Commission's proposal to combine emission reductions and carbon removals in the EU's 2030 climate target. The authors contend that such a 'net target' approach risks diluting mitigation efforts, lacks democratic legitimacy, and ignores the inherent uncertainties and reversibility of carbon removals, particularly from natural sinks.

The document analyzes strategies for scaling Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) to meet IPCC 1.5°C goals. It recommends supporting biological CDR through domestic regulation rather than carbon markets due to non-permanence risks, and suggests targeted R&D and pilot support for technological CDR (BECCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering, and mineral carbonation). Crucially, it argues that separate targets for emissions and removals are superior to combined net-zero targets to prevent the diversion of attention from essential emission reductions and to prepare for a future net-negative CO2 phase.

The document outlines a framework for countries to develop comprehensive net-zero targets, emphasizing the need for deep decarbonization, the use of carbon removals, and the importance of just transitions. It argues that targets should cover all greenhouse gases and sectors, be legally binding where possible, and be supported by transparent communication and stakeholder engagement to drive near- and midterm climate action.

The document outlines a framework for establishing comprehensive net-zero targets, emphasizing the need for all-sector and all-gas coverage, the setting of separate emissions reduction targets to avoid over-reliance on carbon removals, and the importance of transparent communication and participatory design processes.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) emphasizes that while solar geoengineering (SG) cannot substitute for emissions reductions, the potential for atmospheric experiments requires robust, transparent, and inclusive public engagement. The brief outlines the risks of SG, such as 'termination shock' and 'moral hazard,' and provides a framework for engagement levels—ranging from informing to empowering—to ensure that research is conducted with societal legitimacy and ethical oversight.

The briefing proposes an annual federal investment of $4–4.5 billion in tree restoration to create over 150,000 jobs and remove up to 540 million tons of carbon dioxide per year in the United States. It suggests utilizing the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and state/local grants to restore up to 60 billion trees over 20 years. The author criticizes the Trillion Trees Act, arguing it lacks sufficient funding and could increase emissions by promoting timber harvests and relaxing environmental reviews.

The report outlines a comprehensive strategy for the United States to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 through a diversified portfolio of carbon removal pathways. It categorizes these into 'Staples' (tree restoration and direct air capture), 'No Regrets' (agricultural soil carbon management), 'Speculative Bets' (carbon mineralization and enhanced root crops), and 'Supplemental Pathways' (BECCS, wood waste preservation, and extended timber rotations). The authors argue that an 'all-of-the-above' approach is the most robust and cost-effective, potentially removing 20 GtCO2 cumulatively by 2050. Key recommendations include federal subsidies for tree restoration, an expanded 45Q tax credit for direct air capture, and a 10-million-acre farm innovation program. The report also emphasizes the need for a 'strong enabling environment,' including low-carbon energy, credible life-cycle assessments, and improved geological storage and monitoring infrastructure.

The document details Carbon Market Watch's efforts to ensure a 'green recovery' following the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically by countering corporate lobbying and pushing for more ambitious EU climate targets. It critiques the lack of progress in global carbon market rules (Article 6) and the perceived irrelevance of the CORSIA aviation scheme. The briefing advocates for expanding the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) to include international shipping and phasing out free pollution permits for heavy industry. It also assesses the inadequacy of national energy and climate plans in several EU member states and warns against the misuse of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies as a substitute for emission cuts.

Mars advocates for a transition to a net-zero carbon economy, urging businesses to adopt science-based targets across value chains and calling on governments to implement carbon pricing and clean energy infrastructure.

The report analyzes future extreme heat in the US, finding that a 'no action' emissions scenario would lead to a staggering increase in dangerously hot days, particularly in the Sunbelt and Midwest, while rapid action could significantly limit these risks.

The document explains the greenhouse effect and the role of human activities in increasing radiative forcing, noting that global warming has reached approximately 1°C since pre-industrial times. It details the global emissions profile by sector and the projected risks associated with 1.5°C versus 2°C warming, emphasizing that the latter significantly increases risks to human health, food security, and biodiversity. The text outlines the evolution of international climate governance from the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement and its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). To limit warming to 1.5°C, the document argues for a transformative shift in the energy mix by 2050, including a drastic reduction in fossil fuel consumption and a move toward renewable energy and carbon dioxide removal technologies.

CIEL responds to critiques of its report 'Fuel to the Fire', asserting that the fossil fuel industry has actively promoted carbon capture and storage (CCS), carbon dioxide removal (CDR), and solar radiation management (SRM) to entrench a fossil-based economy. The organization provides specific examples of industry-funded researchers and think tanks shaping geoengineering discourse and argues that these technologies are more likely to exacerbate the climate crisis by delaying the necessary phase-out of fossil fuels.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law examines the fossil fuel industry's involvement in the development and promotion of geoengineering technologies, arguing that these strategies are used to justify the continued use of carbon-intensive fuels and avoid systemic change.

The report examines how carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM) are promoted by fossil fuel interests to justify continued oil, gas, and coal production. It argues that these technologies often rely on fossil fuel by-products or enable enhanced oil recovery, creating a 'moral hazard' that distracts from viable renewable energy transitions.