Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that while the EU's Fit for 55 Package is essential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030, its mitigation policies risk disproportionately affecting vulnerable citizens and workers in carbon-intensive industries. It recommends a progressive approach to fiscal reform, including the redistribution of carbon revenues and the use of the Social Climate Fund, to maintain political support and protect living standards. The paper emphasizes the need for targeted energy policies to address high energy prices and active reconversion policies for regions dependent on fossil fuels, noting the role of the Just Transition Fund in supporting coal-dependent areas.

The author contends that using the Market Stability Reserve (MSR) as a funding source for REPowerEU is destructive, as it would increase pollution limits, depress carbon prices, and reduce industrial incentives to decarbonize. The text suggests alternative funding methods, such as auctioning free pollution permits, and calls for the exclusion of fossil fuel infrastructure investments from the REPowerEU plan.

Carbon Market Watch argues that including international maritime transport in the EU ETS is essential for sector decarbonisation given the lack of progress at the International Maritime Organisation. The organization recommends covering 100% of international voyages to and from the European Economic Area, starting in 2024, and expanding the scope to include non-CO2 gases and vessels from 400 to 5,000 gross tonnage. It further advocates for the removal of exemptions for outermost regions and specific vessel types, and the creation of an Ocean Fund to receive 75% of generated revenues to support zero-carbon fuels and energy efficiency.

The report examines the shift from traditional energy efficiency programs, which focus on raw energy savings, toward 'climate-forward efficiency' that prioritizes GHG reductions. It identifies two types of performance incentive mechanisms (PIMs): 'explicit GHG' PIMs, which directly reward carbon reductions, and 'policy intent' PIMs, which implicitly encourage GHG reductions through fuel switching or time-based savings. The document highlights early implementations in New York, Vermont, and Washington, D.C., and suggests that tracking metrics and scorecards can serve as a starting point for states not yet ready for full PIMs.

The report analyzes how 'climateflation', 'fossilflation', and 'greenflation' impact price stability and proposes that the ECB align its operations with EU climate goals, implement green lending facilities for building renovation, and coordinate with the EIB and European Commission to fund a just energy transition.

The report argues that the EU steel sector faces a critical investment window as 74% of blast furnace capacity requires renewal by 2030. It advocates for a combination of carbon pricing, circular economy measures, and innovative finance tools like Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfDs) to scale low-carbon technologies such as green hydrogen and Direct Reduced Iron (DRI). The document emphasizes that while public funds are insufficient, the green bond market and transition finance instruments can mobilize the necessary private capital, provided there are science-based standards to prevent greenwashing.

The Canadian Climate Institute argues that the proposed Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) contain ambiguities and exemptions that could undermine Canada's 2035 net zero electricity target. The Institute recommends clarifying the treatment of existing power units, removing financial exemptions for emergency emissions, and phasing out output-based pricing in favor of a full carbon price. To maintain climate credibility and affordability, it suggests the government use financial compliance revenues to procure negative emissions and address equity concerns through targeted public investment and rate design rather than by diluting the CER's stringency.

The report argues that the Canadian oil and gas sector, which accounted for nearly 27% of national greenhouse gas emissions in 2020, must transition to remain competitive as global demand for crude oil is projected to decline by approximately 80% by 2050. Short-term priorities include a drastic reduction of methane fugitive emissions—targeting a 75% reduction by 2030—and the implementation of a sector-specific emissions cap that declines to net-zero by 2050. Long-term, the author proposes that the industry pivot toward producing low-carbon fuels and chemical feedstocks using blue and green hydrogen, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and biomass. The report suggests creating industrial hubs in locations like Fort Saskatchewan and Medicine Hat to coordinate the production and storage of hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon, effectively transforming oil and gas companies into 'carbon management companies'.

The policy brief argues that Canada lacks a shared definition of 'inefficient fossil fuel subsidies,' which hinders its commitment to phase them out. It proposes a four-part assessment framework—alignment with climate commitments, support for a low-carbon economy, just transition consistency, and overall policy effectiveness—to ensure transparency and accountability in eliminating these subsidies.

The briefing argues that Canada lacks a clear definition of 'inefficient' fossil fuel subsidies, which hinders its commitment to phase them out. It proposes four criteria for evaluation: compliance with climate commitments, support for a low-emission economy, consistency with a just transition, and optimal policy achievement. The authors recommend adopting the WTO definition of subsidies and applying these criteria to both federal and provincial funding to ensure transparency and accountability.

The report analyzes the fiscal vulnerability of the BRIICS countries to the global energy transition. Using IEA scenarios, it projects significant declines in fossil fuel revenues by 2050, particularly under 1.5°C and 2°C pathways. To mitigate these risks, the authors propose a 'GSS bond support fund' to leverage near-term windfall revenues for decarbonization and suggest a broad suite of environmental fiscal reforms, including subsidy removal and the introduction of carbon pricing and road user charges.

The document examines the social implications of the European Commission's 'Fit for 55' package, specifically the introduction of carbon pricing for road transport and buildings (ETS2). It highlights the proposed EUR 72 billion Social Climate Fund (2025-2032) designed to provide income support to vulnerable households and fund emission-reduction measures to ensure public acceptance and a fair transition away from fossil fuels.

The California Energy Policy Simulator (EPS) 3.3.1 update finds that current policy commitments will leave California's 2030 emissions nearly 20% above the SB 32 target. To address this, Energy Innovation proposes a 'Deeper Decarbonization Scenario' focusing on rapid electrification of vehicles, appliances, and industry, alongside a strengthened clean energy standard. This approach is projected to lower 2030 emissions to 230 MMT of CO2e and generate significant economic and public health benefits, including $60 billion in monetized social benefits by 2050, while reducing reliance on unproven carbon dioxide removal technologies.

The paper argues that COVID-19 recovery should move beyond short-term stimulus to 'structural reforms' that are systemic, long-lasting, and general purpose. It introduces a 'Green Structural Recovery Menu' featuring ten high-level measures, including green fiscal reform and natural capital investment. The authors provide a toolkit of prioritisation criteria—categorised as conventional, advanced, and systemic/political—to help governments align policies with specific goals like job creation or planetary boundaries. The report identifies significant gaps in current agendas, particularly regarding gender integration, nature-based solutions, and support for MSMEs. It also addresses the financing challenge for the global south, suggesting debt-for-nature swaps and blended finance. Case studies from countries such as South Korea, Indonesia, and Pakistan illustrate the practical challenges and mixed results of implementing these reforms.

The report argues that governments are reacting to the energy crisis by prioritizing short-term fossil fuel security over long-term decarbonization, risking a 'gold rush' for new gas infrastructure and domestic production. While some progress in renewables and green hydrogen is noted, the authors highlight a prevalence of 'bad practices' such as fossil fuel subsidies, tax cuts for petrol, and the expansion of LNG facilities. The document provides a framework of 'do's and don'ts', urging governments to instead focus on energy efficiency, electrification, behavioral changes, and the reinvestment of fossil fuel windfall profits into clean energy to avoid stranded assets and irreversible warming.

The report finds that neither the scale of capital investment nor access to financing are primary obstacles to Sweden's green industrial transition. Instead, the most critical barriers are the lack of market demand for more expensive green products, insufficient infrastructure (particularly renewable electricity), and slow permitting processes. The authors recommend that policymakers focus on market formation through carbon pricing and the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), while continuing direct support for R&D and demonstration projects through programs like Industriklivet.

The document examines the socio-economic risks associated with the EU's 'Fit for 55' package, specifically the introduction of ETS2. It argues that carbon pricing alone is insufficient to drive decarbonization and may disproportionately affect low-income rural households. While the Social Climate Fund provides a mechanism for compensation and investment, the authors suggest a broader approach including digitalization, subnational capacity building, and structural inequality reforms is necessary for a fair transition.

The report examines the economic opportunities of transitioning to net-zero emissions by 2050 across several major economies. It argues that public investment can drive innovation and growth through signalling, crowding-in private capital, and reducing unit costs. While fossil fuel-exporting nations like the US, Canada, and Indonesia may face long-term GDP losses as global demand for hydrocarbons falls, the report finds that most subject economies—including the EU, UK, India, Japan, and South Africa—experience net gains in GDP and employment. The transition is predicted to significantly reduce household expenditure on fossil fuels, improve public health by reducing pollution, and enhance energy security, particularly for the EU in the context of reducing dependence on Russian gas.

The report argues that an accelerated clean energy transition is economically beneficial, reducing household energy bills, creating jobs, and increasing GDP growth compared to business-as-usual scenarios. It outlines specific policy levers—such as decarbonizing power systems by 2035/2040 and phasing out coal—that can drive these gains. Modelling shows significant per capita energy savings in G7 nations and substantial job creation in developing economies like India and Indonesia.

The We Mean Business Coalition urges G7 leaders to lead a rapid transition away from fossil fuels through specific targets, including decarbonized power systems by 2035 and the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies by 2025. The coalition emphasizes that the war in Ukraine has highlighted the vulnerability of fossil fuel dependence and calls for strengthened NDCs, scaled-up renewable energy, and mandatory corporate climate disclosures to ensure a just and people-centred transition.