Search Climate Insights Directory

The policy brief examines the risks of including the LULUCF sector in the EU's 2030 climate framework, specifically the danger that carbon sinks could be used to reduce the decarbonization efforts of sectors like transport and manufacturing. It identifies four primary reasons why LULUCF is unfit for integration with other climate instruments: high data uncertainty (32% compared to 1% for fossil fuels), incomplete accounting methods that allow for over-crediting, the non-permanence of biological carbon stores, and the need for carbon removals to be additional to, rather than replacements for, emission reductions. The author highlights specific accounting flaws, such as 'Gross-net accounting' and 'forest management reference levels' (FMRL), which may allow Member States to generate unearned credits. Additionally, the brief criticizes the assumption of biomass carbon neutrality, noting that emissions from burning wood are often unaccounted for in the EU ETS or ESD. The document recommends that LULUCF be maintained in a separate pillar, that land-use offsets be prohibited, and that biomass sustainability criteria be strictly enforced.

The World Resources Institute proposes six domestic actions for the Obama administration in 2016: implementing the Clean Power Plan, reducing methane emissions from existing gas infrastructure, banning more potent hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), preparing industrial emission standards, finalizing fuel efficiency for heavy-duty trucks and aircraft, and increasing local climate resilience support. It also urges the U.S. to sign the Paris Agreement, meet Green Climate Fund commitments, and mobilize resources for Mission Innovation to sustain global momentum.

The document describes REDD+ as a voluntary framework for developing countries to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation while enhancing forest carbon stocks. It details the five core activities, the three phases of implementation (readiness, implementation, and results-based finance), and the requirements for receiving results-based payments, including national strategies and monitoring systems. The report also outlines how the 2015 Paris Agreement integrates REDD+ into the global climate architecture, specifically regarding Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and transparency frameworks.

A coalition of environmental organisations urges the European Commission to adopt 'Option 1' for the 2030 Climate and Energy Framework, which establishes a separate LULUCF pillar. They argue that including Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) in the general 'at least 40 per cent' reduction target would dilute ambition by 3-7 percentage points. The authors call for the removal of fungibility between pillars, the use of base-period accounting instead of reference levels for forest management to expose bioenergy emissions, and the maintenance of agricultural non-CO2 emissions within a strengthened Effort Sharing Decision (ESD).

The study finds that while agricultural prices drive deforestation, conservation policies implemented in 2004 and 2008 significantly curbed forest loss. Counterfactual simulations estimate that these policies avoided approximately 73,000 square kilometers of deforestation from 2005 to 2009, equivalent to 2.7 billion tonnes of stored carbon dioxide. The analysis indicates that the deforestation slowdown did not result in a major downturn for the local agricultural sector or municipal GDP per capita.

The document argues that LULUCF should be treated separately in the EU's 2030 climate framework to prevent its carbon sink from being used to reduce mitigation efforts in energy, industry, and transport. It emphasizes that land-use policies must prioritize biodiversity and environmental integrity over simple carbon sequestration, specifically recommending the rewetting of peatlands and the end of subsidies for unsustainable farming. Globally, it calls for the EU to address its role as a major importer of deforestation-embodied products through mandatory standards and a new EU Action Plan on deforestation.

The document examines the 'Sustainable Urban Tourism through Low Carbon Initiatives' project in Hue, Vietnam. It identifies that the tourism sector emitted approximately 492,200 tons of CO2e in 2011, with travel being the largest source. The city promoted 'garden houses' as a viable mitigation strategy because they act as carbon sinks, reduce waste through composting, and lower freight emissions by producing local food. This approach also supports local employment, particularly for middle-aged women and non-motorised transport operators. While the initiative reduced in-situ emissions and strengthened the city's commitment to sustainable tourism, the document notes a trade-off: increased tourist attraction may lead to higher overall emissions from travel to the city, which exceeds local reductions.

The Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) covers approximately 60% of EU greenhouse gas emissions, focusing on sectors like transport, buildings, and agriculture. The document argues that the 2013-2020 targets were too weak, leading to a projected surplus of 600 million tons of CO2-eq by 2020. It recommends that the 2030 framework significantly increase targets to at least 45% below 2005 levels, exclude international offsets, and maintain a separate pillar for land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) to avoid undermining overall climate ambition.

Carbon Market Watch recommends that the European Council increase the EU's 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target to at least 55% and permanently remove the surplus of over 2.5 billion emissions allowances in the EU ETS. The organization warns that carrying over this surplus could weaken the 40% target to a de facto 33% reduction. It further argues against the use of international offsets due to poor environmental quality and cautions that including land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sectors as net sinks would undermine the effectiveness of the GHG target.

The document examines the IPCC's 2014 report on climate change mitigation, noting that global greenhouse gas emissions have accelerated despite existing climate plans. It argues that to limit temperature rise to 2°C, emissions must be reduced by 40-70% by 2050 and reach almost zero by 2100, requiring radical technological and institutional shifts. While the report finds these goals technically and economically feasible, it stresses the urgency of investments between 2010 and 2030 to avoid costly and risky negative emission technologies like large-scale biomass combined with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).

The report proposes a Production and Protection (P&P) strategy for Brazil to reconcile economic growth in agriculture with environmental conservation. It identifies significant within-region productivity gaps in cattle ranching, crop farming, and small-scale agriculture, suggesting that productivity gains can be achieved without further deforestation. Key barriers to these gains include limited access to credit, underdeveloped land rental markets, poor infrastructure, and gaps in technological diffusion. On the protection side, the report highlights the need to combat small-scale Amazon deforestation, enforce the Forest Code on private lands via the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR), and develop market-based incentives for biomes like the Cerrado.

The statement by Friends of the Earth International warns that treating nature and forests as financial assets leads to environmental destruction and social injustice. It specifically critiques the promotion of industrial tree plantations as carbon sinks, arguing that they lack the biodiversity of native forests and cause community displacement and human rights violations.

The text highlights the ecological and social costs of coal mining in Central India, specifically the loss of biodiversity and displacement of forest communities. It notes that despite doubling coal production capacity since 2007, 400 million Indians still lack electricity. The document criticizes the failure of 22 out of 29 Indian states to meet Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) targets in 2012 and argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) acts as a fossil fuel subsidy by providing credits to coal plants that do not achieve real emission reductions.

The document highlights a trend of increasingly destructive wildfires in the U.S., driven by climate change and a lack of funding for hazardous fuel reduction. It notes that forests are shifting from carbon sinks to emitters and that the U.S. Forest Service faces significant budget cuts despite rising fire risks. The author proposes that developing markets for woody biomass and bioenergy could provide a sustainable funding mechanism for forest restoration and wildfire prevention.

The report finds that the implementation of the satellite-based DETER system was the primary driver of the deforestation slowdown in the Brazilian Amazon during the 2000s. By enabling the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (Ibama) to target law enforcement more effectively, these policies prevented the clearing of over 59,500 km² of forest from 2007 to 2011. The analysis indicates that these conservation efforts did not adversely affect agricultural production and provided significant net monetary gains when compared to the costs of monitoring and enforcement.

The report establishes a reference case for greenhouse gas emissions in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) from 1990 to 2030. It identifies agriculture as the largest non-LULUCF emitting sector and notes a significant historical shift where the DRC moved from being a large net carbon sink in 2000 to a small net emitter by 2010. The projections are based on GDP and population growth forecasts, though the report highlights substantial data gaps and uncertainties, particularly in the LULUCF and agriculture sectors.

The document argues that traditional separations between adaptation, mitigation, and development are insufficient. It proposes 'climate compatible development' as a framework to achieve 'triple win' outcomes: low emissions, high resilience, and sustained human development. It highlights a new development landscape where climate finance, shifting trade patterns, and technological innovation redefine economic growth, particularly for developing nations.

China's energy intensity decreased by 15.6% between 2005 and 2009, putting it on track to meet its 11th Five-Year Plan target of a 20% reduction. The report finds that while top-down administrative measures and plant closures were effective, much of the 'low-hanging fruit' has been picked, suggesting that future reductions in the 12th Five-Year Plan will be more costly. Sectoral analysis shows significant gains in power and manufacturing efficiency, while the building and transport sectors faced challenges from rapid urbanization and a shift toward more energy-intensive transport modes. Agriculture and forestry provided significant carbon sinks through afforestation, though fertilizer use remains a primary source of emissions.

The report examines the jatropha biofuel industry in Mozambique, challenging the 'myths' that the crop grows well on marginal lands, requires minimal water, and is pest-resistant. It finds that both small-scale and industrial plantations typically occupy fertile arable land and often fail to meet promised yields. The document highlights risks to food security, as subsistence farmers replace food crops with jatropha, and reports widespread land grabbing facilitated by government corruption and the manipulation of the 1997 Land Law. It concludes that jatropha is not a viable development tool for Mozambique and recommends halting its support until food sovereignty is guaranteed.

The report challenges the narrative that jatropha is a 'miracle crop' for Mozambique, finding that it requires fertile land and significant water, is vulnerable to pests that can spread to food crops, and often leads to land grabbing and economic instability for subsistence farmers.