Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that the massive fiscal stimulus required for COVID-19 recovery presents a unique opportunity to transition to a low-carbon economy. It suggests that climate-aligned investments offer higher returns than traditional spending, citing benefit-cost ratios for adaptation between 2:1 and 10:1. The author proposes seven action areas: managing corporate bailouts with emissions targets, investing in climate-smart infrastructure (such as renewable energy and nature-based solutions), promoting regulatory reform, reforming tax and subsidy policies (including cutting fossil fuel subsidies), integrating climate risks into financial regulations, enhancing the role of development finance institutions, and sponsoring R&D for new technologies. The text emphasizes that green investments can create more jobs than fossil fuel investments, noting that in the US, $1 million spent on renewable energy creates 7.5 FTE jobs compared to 2.7 in fossil fuels.

The document explores the intersection of COVID-19 recovery and climate action, arguing that state bailout packages and stimulus measures provide a short window to drive decarbonization and align recovery with the Paris Agreement. It examines the shifting role of the state, the potential for universal basic income to support transitioning workers, and the opportunity to leverage increased public trust in science to counter populism. The paper also highlights the risk of "quick hit" high-carbon responses and the need to avoid backsliding into business-as-usual development.

The document exposes lobbying efforts by large polluters and the aviation industry to undermine climate action during the pandemic. It details attempts by groups like BusinessEurope and national trade associations in France, Germany, and the Netherlands to delay legislation and carbon taxes. It specifically critiques the aviation industry's push for unconditional bailouts and efforts to weaken the CORSIA carbon market baseline. The author argues that the pandemic should be used to accelerate a green recovery rather than return to business-as-usual, recommending the phase-out of free pollution permits and the introduction of fuel taxes.

The authors argue that COVID-19 economic bailouts present a rare opportunity to integrate climate goals into stimulus policies. They suggest linking financial assistance for sectors like aviation and oil and gas to carbon emission limits and clean energy transitions, citing the 2008 US auto bailouts as a precedent for successful conditional support. The text advocates for specific measures such as a carbon tax on jet fuel, the creation of a US national electricity market, and the adoption of the EU's green deal targets to ensure long-term economic competitiveness and energy security.

The report examines the Indonesia Environmental Fund Agency (BPDLH), established in October 2019 to bridge financing gaps for environmental protection and climate goals. By utilizing the Public Service Agency (BLU) legal vehicle, BPDLH gains flexibility in sourcing funds from both the state budget and international donors, as well as in its procurement and staffing. The document compares BPDLH to seven other fund-managing BLUs, noting that BPDLH is unique in its ability to act as a strategic hub for diverse funding mechanisms. It specifically details two initial funding windows: the REDD+ fund, which uses result-based payments and grants for various stakeholders, and the Forest Rehabilitation Revolving Fund, which provides loans to private enterprises in the forestry sector.

The report finds that 75% of registered U.S. voters believe global warming is happening, with strong bipartisan support for renewable energy research and the Paris Climate Agreement. However, significant polarization remains regarding the causes of global warming and the Green New Deal, with Democrats viewing climate change as a much higher voting priority than Republicans.

The document analyzes a proposed $0.25 per gallon federal gas tax increase, finding it would generate approximately $1.1 trillion in revenue through 2050 and reduce total fuel consumption by over 1.3 billion barrels. The tax would incentivize the adoption of electric vehicles, adding roughly 2.5 million additional EVs to U.S. roads by 2050. Additionally, the report notes that a $0.25 gas tax is equivalent to a carbon tax of $25 to $29 per ton, which exceeds the record high allowance auction prices of the California-Quebec and Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cap-and-trade systems.

South Africa introduced a carbon tax in 2019 to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets of 34% by 2020 and 42% by 2025. The policy primarily targets the energy sector, which is responsible for approximately 80% of the country's emissions due to a heavy reliance on coal. While the tax aims to incentivize a shift toward renewable energy, it faces challenges including potential conflicts with WTO non-discrimination principles, the risk of carbon leakage due to a lack of border price adjustments, and negative socio-economic impacts such as increased consumer prices and potential job losses in energy-intensive industries like mining and steel. The document argues for a balanced approach that includes worker re-skilling, targeted incentives for renewables, and regional coordination through agreements like the AfCFTA to prevent protectionism and ensure a just transition.

The document argues that South Africa can achieve strategic goals—including preparing for ICAO's CORSIA framework, supporting its tourism sector against 'flight shame', and creating green jobs—by developing a domestic SAF industry. It identifies a wide range of policy tools such as blending mandates, financial incentives, and taxation. The brief proposes a phased roadmap for South Africa: short-term (2020-2025) focus on a 2-3% blending mandate and a long-term (beyond 2030) target to replace 50% of aviation fuel with locally produced SAF by 2050.

The report frames the climate as a critical infrastructure asset, asserting that the economic costs of inaction—comprising direct physical losses, indirect growth reductions, and market uncertainty—are significantly higher than the costs of preventive climate action. It provides specific financial projections for the United States, noting that value-at-risk for all assets could reach $5.2 trillion under a 4.5°C warming scenario and $17 trillion under a 6.0°C scenario. Conversely, it highlights that targeted investments, such as building retrofits and grid upgrades, offer positive financial returns, and a $50/ton carbon tax could generate $180 billion in annual revenue from 2020-2029 while helping avoid trillions in climate-related costs.

The report details a policy dialogue workshop in Tallinn, Estonia, aimed at designing pathways toward a sustainable bioeconomy in the Baltic Sea region. Participants identified energy as the primary driving sector and emphasized the need for high-value-added products, localized value chains, and a shift in consumer thinking. Five key enabling factors were identified: clear policy goals (including carbon taxes and national strategies), support for research and innovation through multi-helix interaction models, public procurement and education to drive demand, cross-sector cooperation to manage biomass competition, and the integration of circularity to preserve biodiversity. The document also reflects on the pilot methodology, noting that the pre-selected global sustainability scenario was too general and that future workshops should group participants by economic sector rather than organization type.

The report examines six specific policy cases from the UK, Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, and Austria to provide a roadmap for decarbonising the non-ETS transport and buildings sectors in CEE countries. It uses a participatory transferability assessment involving experts from Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria to identify regional barriers and opportunities for 'leap-frogging' to best practices.

A February 2020 survey of 1,934 registered voters across 26 U.S. primary states reveals strong support for government action on climate change and a preference for renewable energy over fossil fuels. A majority of respondents support the Green New Deal and specific policies such as a 100% national renewable portfolio standard by 2050. Climate change is a top-tier voting issue for Democrats in these states, and voters indicate they are more likely to support candidates who favor stronger pollution and fuel efficiency standards.

The document argues that solar PV is a financially viable option for South African businesses, capable of reducing electricity costs by approximately 15% with payback periods between 3 and 12 years. It highlights that larger systems benefit from economies of scale, with capital costs for systems over 500 kWp falling below R10k per kWp. The brief also details various financial incentives, including tax benefits (12i and 12b) and VAT deductibility, and notes that the Western Cape is a leader in implementing regulations and feed-in tariffs for Small Scale Embedded Generation (SSEG).

The report highlights a transition toward sustainable agriculture in South Africa, driven by climate change, water scarcity, and rising input costs. Key investment areas include undercover farming, renewable energy, conservation agriculture, precision agriculture, and urban agriculture. It emphasizes the Western Cape as a strategic hub for greentech due to its high-value export crop production and supportive government environment.

The South African energy services market, comprising small-scale embedded generation (SSEG), energy storage, and energy efficiency, is projected to reach a total available market value of approximately R125 billion by 2035. Growth is driven by rising Eskom electricity tariffs, falling costs of renewable technologies, and supportive regulatory shifts, such as the unbundling of Eskom and the 2019 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). Key emerging opportunities include the bundling of rooftop solar PV projects to attract larger investors, solar PV for energy resellers in property developments, and the retrofitting of existing buildings for energy efficiency. While the C&I sector currently dominates solar installations, the energy storage market is expected to grow significantly through grid management and resource adequacy applications, potentially valued between R15 billion and R30 billion by 2030.

The document outlines the scale of food loss and waste in South Africa, noting that 27% of produced and imported food was wasted in 2011. It emphasizes a shift in the Western Cape toward mandatory organic waste diversion from landfills by 2027. The brief identifies key drivers for beneficiation, such as the Carbon Tax Act and Sustainable Development Goal 12.3, while detailing barriers including lack of source separation and liability fears regarding food donations. It proposes 29 solutions across prevention, recovery, and recycling categories and advocates for the adoption of the World Resource Institute's FLW Standard for better data recording.

The report identifies significant economic potential in diverting waste from landfills in South Africa, particularly in the Western Cape. Key opportunities are highlighted in the organics, plastics, e-waste, and construction sectors, driven by dwindling landfill airspace, rising disposal costs, and emerging regulations like Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and the Carbon Tax Act. The Western Cape is positioned as a greentech hub, with the City of Cape Town generating the majority of the region's waste and offering the highest market value for beneficiation.

The report finds that achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) targets by 2030 requires an additional 33 billion USD per year in public spending. This total is split between an additional 14 billion USD from international donors and 19 billion USD from low- and middle-income countries through increased taxation. These investments, focused heavily on Africa, would prevent 490 million people from suffering from hunger and double the incomes of 545 million small-scale producers while adhering to Paris Agreement climate commitments. The proposed funding is distributed across three intervention categories: empowering the excluded, on-farm productivity, and food movement.

South Africa is identified as the second-worst performer among G20 non-OECD member countries due to a lack of transparency and continued support for fossil fuels. Total government support averaged USD 10.9 billion between 2017 and 2019, with the largest portion directed toward fossil fuel-based power. Support increased by 14% relative to the 2014–2016 average, driven largely by price support. The document highlights significant unquantified support, including billions in bailouts and loan guarantees for the state-owned utility Eskom, as well as carbon tax exemptions for major emitters like Sasol.