Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the security implications of climate change in the South and East China Seas, focusing on the interplay between regional political cohesion and food prices. It presents four scenarios—ranging from high cooperation and low prices to high fragmentation and food insecurity—to illustrate potential risks, including social unrest, the failure of governance, and increased Chinese maritime aggression. The analysis emphasizes that climate change acts as a threat multiplier, exacerbating existing geopolitical tensions and socio-economic inequalities in Southeast and East Asia.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has forced European states to prioritize energy security over climate goals, leading to a 'dash for LNG' that outbids developing nations and encourages a global return to coal. This shift undermines EU climate leadership and risks 'locking in' long-term fossil fuel infrastructure in Africa and Asia.

Recourse urges development finance institutions (DFIs) to suspend Russia and Belarus as members, divest from their companies, and cease operations in both countries. The organization argues that the war is fueled by a global addiction to fossil fuels and calls for a ban on Russian fossil fuel imports and an end to financial support for fossil fuel infrastructure in Russia to avoid replacing Russian fuels with other fossil fuels like liquefied natural gas.

A coalition of international environmental and social organizations has demanded that a wide range of global banks, insurers, and asset managers immediately stop providing financing, investment, and insurance to Russian coal, oil, and gas companies. The letter argues that financial support for these entities directly fuels the war in Ukraine and contradicts commitments to carbon neutrality. The signatories specifically request the divestment of existing assets and the suspension of services for non-Russian companies still active in Russia, such as TotalEnergies and Wintershall DEA, noting that BP, Shell, Equinor, and ExxonMobil have already committed to withdraw.

Reclaim Finance has issued an open letter to Crédit Agricole's CEO, Philippe Brassac, demanding the bank stop financing fossil fuel companies active in Russia. The organization calls for the blacklisting of companies on the Urgewald Global Coal Exit List and Global Oil and Gas Exit List, specifically mentioning Gazprom. The letter further requests the suspension of support for companies like TotalEnergies, Uniper/Fortum, and Wintershall DEA until they exit Russian operations, arguing that fossil fuel dependence drives both climate change and international conflict.

Reclaim Finance urges Crédit Agricole to stop providing financial services to coal, oil, and gas companies active in Russia, specifically citing the bank's role as a main banker for Gazprom and its support for TotalEnergies. The organization argues that fossil fuel dependence fuels both international conflict and climate change, calling for a shift toward renewables and energy savings to achieve carbon neutrality.

Reclaim Finance calls on Crédit Agricole to stop financing Russian coal, oil, and gas companies, specifically highlighting the bank's role as a main banker for Gazprom. The letter demands divestment from a provided blacklist of Russian energy firms and the suspension of support for non-Russian companies still active in Russia, such as TotalEnergies, until they withdraw.

Reclaim Finance calls on Groupe Crédit Agricole to stop financing Russian coal, oil, and gas companies and to divest from them via Amundi. The organization specifically highlights Crédit Agricole's role as a major financier of Gazprom and its significant investment in TotalEnergies, demanding that support for the latter and other non-Russian firms like Fortum/Uniper and Wintershall DEA be suspended until they exit Russian operations.

Reclaim Finance argues that Amundi's strategy of increasing passive management, specifically through the acquisition of Lyxor, creates a loophole where billions of euros in assets remain uncovered by coal exclusion policies. The document further contends that Amundi's engagement with companies like Glencore and its policies on unconventional fossil fuels effectively support continued fossil fuel expansion rather than a genuine 1.5°C-aligned transition.

ClientEarth has written to the Society of Lloyd’s to challenge the lack of transparency and enforcement mechanisms in its ESG Guidance. The letter questions how the Society will judge the adequacy of managing agents' climate strategies, whether it will require the publication of targets, and what specific actions will be taken if agents fail to meet net-zero goals or continue providing cover for high-carbon activities like coal and Arctic oil.

In 2021, EU-27 electricity demand nearly returned to 2019 levels, with renewables reaching a record 1068 TWh and accounting for 37% of production. A critical shift occurred in the second half of 2021 when soaring gas prices made fossil gas more expensive than coal, leading new renewable output to predominantly replace gas rather than coal. While wind and solar output hit record highs (547 TWh), overall power sector emissions fell by an average of 2.5% per year since 2019, which is less than half the 6% annual decline required to align with a 1.5C pathway. Nuclear power continued a long-term structural decline, accounting for 26% of production in 2021.

The report finds that South Africa's energy fiscal policies are largely misaligned with its climate goals, with fossil fuel subsidies totaling ZAR 172 billion in FY 2020/21. These subsidies, particularly Eskom bailouts and carbon tax exemptions, outweigh the ZAR 100.5 billion in fossil fuel revenues. The social costs of fossil fuel combustion—estimated at a minimum of ZAR 550 billion annually—far exceed both revenues and subsidies. While the Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (REIPPPP) has successfully lowered renewable energy costs, investment has been hindered by political opposition and Eskom's financial instability. The report recommends tying bailouts to transition reforms, phasing out carbon tax exemptions, and using fossil fuel tax revenues to support vulnerable households and a just transition.

The report inventories 78 support measures for Indonesia's energy sector between FY 2016 and FY 2020, covering oil and gas, coal, electricity, renewable energy, biofuels, and electric vehicles (EVs). It details various mechanisms including direct fund transfers, tax exemptions, and price supports, noting that only 37% of these measures were quantified due to data limitations.

Reclaim Finance reports that Amundi continues to support coal-expanding companies despite a 2019 commitment to exit the sector. The analysis finds that 94% of coal companies in the portfolios of major French financial institutions lack satisfactory exit plans, and Amundi is invested in all of them. The document highlights failures in Amundi's passive management strategy, where it voted in favor of 78% of resolutions from 13 coal developers, and criticizes its engagement policy for lacking precise requirements and binding sanctions.

The report examines how World Bank Development Policy Finance (DPF) in Indonesia and Pakistan has facilitated the expansion of fossil fuels. In Indonesia, a $500 million loan specifically promoted natural gas infrastructure, while the Bank's private sector arm, the IFC, has been linked to coal projects. In Pakistan, the $400 million PACE program's 'prior actions' led to the fast-tracking of an energy plan (IGCEP) that slashed renewable energy targets from 30-33% to 17% and increased reliance on coal, gas, and large-scale hydropower. The authors conclude that DPF often supports fossil fuels by default through sector stabilisation and recommend that all fossil fuels be added to the World Bank's Excluded Expenditures list.

ClientEarth argues that the Society of Lloyd’s is risking 'greenwash' by making public net-zero commitments while keeping the specific guidance issued to managing agents private. The letter asserts that without transparency, it is impossible to verify if Lloyd's is following a science-based pathway or maintaining its previous 'Fuel Targets' to exit coal, tar sands, and Arctic oil. ClientEarth warns that misleading statements could breach the legal and regulatory duties of the Society and its Council members under FCA and PRA rules.

Recourse urges Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) to stop all direct and indirect fossil fuel financing and to commit to ambitious climate finance targets at COP26. The statement argues that current pledges, such as the MDBs' $175 billion commitment by 2025, are inadequate. It specifically criticizes the World Bank for promoting gas as a transition fuel through Development Policy Finance, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) for a portfolio where fossil fuel spending nearly doubles renewable energy spending, and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for approving nearly $5 billion in gas project financing since the Paris Agreement. Recourse also calls for the World Bank to match the African Development Bank's pledge of 75 million new off-grid connections by 2025 to address energy deficits in Sub-Saharan Africa.

The document explains that the 1.5-degree-C target, established under the 2015 Paris Agreement, is a critical threshold to limit cataclysmic climate impacts. While the Earth has already warmed by 1.2 degrees C since the Industrial Revolution, reaching the 1.5-degree-C limit requires cutting global carbon emissions in half by 2030 and achieving net-zero by 2050. This necessitates a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels—specifically leaving 90% of coal and 60% of oil and gas reserves in the ground—and ending deforestation. The guide warns that the world has already experienced temporary breaches of this threshold and faces a 66% chance of doing so for at least one year between now and 2027. It advises journalists to communicate both the current impacts of 1.2 degrees C and the available solutions to avoid public paralysis while emphasizing that every fraction of a degree of warming increases global risk.

The 2021 Production Gap Report finds that governments plan to produce significantly more fossil fuels by 2030 than is consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C, with the gap remaining largely unchanged from previous assessments. While some G20 countries and multilateral development banks have reduced finance for fossil fuel production, over USD 300 billion in new funds have been directed toward fossil fuel activities since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, exceeding investments in clean energy.

The authors contend that Russia's current climate pledges are insufficient and that the government must acknowledge the global shift away from coal to protect its coal-producing regions, particularly Kuzbass, from economic disruption. While Russia is a top global coal exporter, the authors warn that the collapse of the global coal development pipeline and policies like the EU's carbon border adjustment mechanism threaten the sector's viability. They advocate for proactive economic diversification and a managed phase-out to support workers and the global 1.5°C target.