Search Climate Insights Directory

The document emphasizes that because CO2 is cumulative, delays in emission cuts lead to higher peak temperatures and greater ecological damage. It warns that overshooting the 1.5°C target and relying on underdeveloped negative emissions technologies (NETs) poses significant risks to marine ecosystems and biodiversity. The author advocates for transparent, comprehensive greenhouse gas mitigation plans and a 'green recovery' from COVID-19, noting that the economic and public health benefits of rapid decarbonization far outweigh the costs.

The 2021 state of global environmental governance was characterized by a shift toward voluntary pledges and a struggle to maintain multilateral progress during the COVID-19 pandemic. While some major meetings, such as the Glasgow COP, returned to in-person formats, many other processes remained in a 'maintenance mode' with only procedural outcomes. The report highlights a growing gap between environmental promises and action, exacerbated by systemic inequalities and vaccine disparity, which hinder the collective ability of states to address climate, nature, and pollution crises.

The document reviews a report by Mulder et al. (2020), which was commissioned by Shell, regarding the impact of Shell's production limits on global energy consumption. The author, Peter Erickson, argues that Mulder et al. use misleading evidence to downplay the link between supply restrictions and price increases. Erickson asserts that reducing supply leads to higher prices and lower consumption, thereby reducing CO2 emissions. He further disputes the claim that other companies would simply take over Shell's licenses, citing national policy shifts in countries like Denmark and the potential for increased investment risk across the fossil fuel sector.

The Center for Climate Integrity calls on President-elect Joe Biden to fulfill campaign promises by appointing a Department of Justice leadership committed to climate accountability and establishing a new DOJ division to support plaintiff-driven litigation against fossil fuel companies.

The document examines the intersection of climate change and human rights, detailing how environmental degradation threatens rights to life, food, health, water, and housing. It outlines the obligations of states to respect, protect, and fulfil these rights, and the responsibilities of businesses to reduce emissions and provide remedies. The handbook specifically focuses on the role of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), presenting case studies of their work in monitoring impacts, handling complaints, providing policy advice, and engaging in international mechanisms like the UNFCCC and the Universal Periodic Review. It highlights that nearly half of Paris Principles-compliant NHRIs have engaged in climate change work, using tools ranging from digital mapping to formal inquiries into 'carbon majors'.

The July 2020 poll of 600 likely voters in Maine shows strong support for suing oil and gas companies for climate-related damages, with 69% of statewide respondents supporting such action post-messaging. A significant majority of respondents (80% statewide) expressed concern about current climate impacts, primarily citing health risks. The data indicates that providing information about the industry's historical knowledge of climate change and its local economic impacts increases the likelihood of support for legal accountability.

A group of European investors warns Fortum that its support for the Datteln 4 coal plant in Germany and Uniper's legal threats against the Dutch government are misaligned with the Paris Agreement and expose the company to significant market and litigation risks. The investors highlight that 79% of EU coal capacity is already loss-making and urge Fortum to commit to a net-zero emissions trajectory by 2050.

This case study describes the first climate change court case in South Africa, concerning the environmental authorisation of the 1200MW Thabametsi coal-fired power station.

The Colombian Supreme Court ruled on April 5, 2018, that the Colombian Amazon possesses rights equivalent to those of a human being, necessitating its protection and restoration. The case was brought by 25 youth plaintiffs who argued that government failure to meet net-zero deforestation targets under the Paris Agreement threatened future generations. Despite the court ordering the government to implement action plans to reach net-zero deforestation by 2020 and create an Intergenerational Pact, the document notes that deforestation continued to increase and municipalities failed to update land management plans, leading plaintiffs to return to court in April 2019.

The case of Urgenda Foundation v The State of the Netherlands resulted in a Supreme Court ruling on 20 December 2019, upholding a lower court's order for the Dutch government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% relative to 1990 levels by the end of 2020. The courts determined that the State has a positive obligation under Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights to take concrete actions against climate change to prevent risks to the right to life and family life. The ruling established that such mandates do not violate the separation of powers, as the government retains discretion over the methods used to achieve the target. This judgment has since influenced climate litigation in other jurisdictions, including Ireland and Australia.

The document outlines the mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies (HRTBs) and provides a strategic guide for climate advocates to engage in the State reporting process. It highlights the benefits of securing non-binding but authoritative 'Concluding Observations' to pressure states, provides examples of successful interventions in countries like Argentina and Norway, and details the five-step reporting cycle from initial submission to national follow-up.

Natural Justice's 2020-2022 strategy shifts from siloed programs to three integrated streams: affirming rights to lands and resources, defending rights against environmental impacts, and standing with communities through legal empowerment. The organization aims to strengthen the capacity of African Indigenous and local communities to challenge extractive projects, influence climate policy, and protect traditional knowledge. Key initiatives include the Community Environmental Legal Officers (CELOs) program, the African Environmental Defenders Initiative, and the Just Energy Transition Africa project. The strategy also details a resourcing plan focused on funding growth, financial sustainability, and internal system upgrades to support its Pan-African operations.

The 2019 Scorecard on Insurance, Coal and Climate Change reveals a growing trend of insurance companies exiting the coal sector. While 17 insurers have limited or ended cover for coal projects—controlling 9.5% of the primary insurance market and 46.4% of the reinsurance market—significant gaps remain. Most policies exclude new projects but continue to cover existing operations. Swiss Re and Zurich are identified as leaders in underwriting, while Legal & General leads in broader climate leadership. Conversely, many US and East Asian insurers are described as 'missing in action,' continuing to provide cover and investment for coal. The report argues that as insurance becomes harder to obtain, coal projects become less bankable, accelerating the industry's demise.

The document details the first climate change court case in South Africa, where the High Court in Pretoria ruled that the decision to authorise the 1200MW Thabametsi coal-fired power station was irrational and unreasonable because it lacked a prior climate impact assessment. The court affirmed that climate change poses a substantial risk to sustainable development and intergenerational justice. Despite the court's order for the Minister to reconsider the appeal based on a climate change impact assessment, the Minister upheld the authorisation, leading to further legal challenges and the withdrawal of funding by three commercial banks in January 2019.

The High Court of Ireland ruled on 19 September 2019 that the government's 2017 National Mitigation Plan was lawful, despite reports that Ireland would fail to meet its 2020 greenhouse gas emission targets. The court determined that the government maintains wide policy-making discretion and that the Plan, as an initial step toward a 2050 goal, did not breach constitutional rights to life or bodily integrity. While the court acknowledged the scientific consensus on the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate global warming, it concluded that intervening in the Plan's specific targets would violate the separation of powers.

The Land and Environment Court of New South Wales dismissed an appeal by Gloucester Resources Limited, upholding the Minister for Planning's refusal to grant consent for an open cut coal mine. The court determined that the project's estimated 38 million tonnes of carbon emissions were contrary to the public interest and the goals of the Paris Agreement. Notably, the court rejected the argument that the project's emissions were too small to be significant globally, asserting that climate change must be addressed through cumulative local actions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) reports that 88 major carbon producers contributed more than half of the increase in ocean acidification and about half of the global temperature rise from 1880 to 2015. The document highlights that these companies, including investor-owned firms like ExxonMobil and Chevron, were aware of the climate risks of their products as early as 1965 but engaged in campaigns to sow doubt. It argues that these entities should be held financially responsible for climate-related damages, such as the $2 billion in additional costs attributed to sea level rise during Hurricane Sandy in New York City.

A survey of 5,131 U.S. adults found that a majority of Americans believe fossil fuel companies are responsible for global warming damages and should bear the costs of these damages rather than taxpayers. Specifically, 57% of respondents attribute a moderate to great deal of responsibility to these companies, and 50% support local officials filing liability lawsuits against them. The data indicates widespread distrust of fossil fuel companies, with 66% of participants expressing distrust.

CIEL supports the New York Attorney General's lawsuit against ExxonMobil, asserting that the company misled investors about the financial and regulatory risks climate change poses to its assets and operations. The statement highlights that the lawsuit, based on three years of investigation, implicates high-level executives, including former CEO Rex Tillerson, and signals an increase in climate-related litigation against fossil fuel companies.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rejected ExxonMobil's attempt to block Attorney General Maura Healey from obtaining records to investigate if the company concealed knowledge about fossil fuels and climate change. The court ruled that Exxon's franchise agreements do not shield it from such investigations and affirmed the Attorney General's authority to use consumer protection statutes to investigate climate denial, potentially setting a precedent for similar litigation in other states with comparable laws.