Search Climate Insights Directory

Over 200 civil society organizations are urging world leaders to stop international public finance for fossil fuels, noting that G20 members provide USD 77 billion annually to fossil fuels compared to USD 28 billion for clean energy. The statement calls for an immediate end to support for the entire fossil fuel value chain, the closure of financial loopholes, and increased climate finance for low-income countries in the Global South to ensure a just energy transition ahead of COP 26.

The Centre for Environmental Rights asserts that South Africa's transition from coal must go beyond energy shifts to encompass a radical restructuring of society. The author warns that southern Africa is warming at twice the global rate, making incremental change impossible. The document advocates for an "Open Agenda for a Just Transition" that integrates clean energy with food sovereignty, gender justice, and a new economic system based on human needs rather than profit.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing groundWork, Vukani Environmental Justice Movement in Action, and the African Climate Alliance, has formally objected to the inclusion of new fossil fuel generation capacity—specifically 1500 MW of new coal—in South Africa's Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) 2019 and a September 2020 ministerial determination. The letter requests that the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy clarify if the IRP 2019 will be updated by the end of 2021, citing a June 2021 announcement by President Ramaphosa to increase the NERSA generation licence exemption threshold to 100 MW. The authors argue this change could unlock over 5000 MW of embedded generation capacity not currently accounted for in the IRP 2019, necessitating a revision of the proposed energy mix.

The statement argues that 100% clean power is a prerequisite for global carbon neutrality by 2050, as established by the IEA. It calls on P4G member countries to leverage recent momentum from the IEA and G7 to transition their power sectors away from fossil fuels, particularly coal, noting that the power sector must reach net zero well before the wider economy to enable the decarbonization of other sectors.

Legal & General is identified as the top UK coal investor, holding $7.2 billion in the sector as of January 2021. The document criticizes the company's weak exclusion thresholds and the fact that its passive assets, totaling $1 trillion, are not subject to coal exclusion policies, allowing continued investment in high-emitting companies like BHP Group.

The IEA Net Zero Scenario projects a massive expansion of solar and wind energy, with solar and wind together providing almost 70% of global electricity by 2050. It calls for an immediate end to new oil, gas, and unabated coal investments, forecasting a 90% decline in coal demand and a 275% decline in oil use by 2050. The transition relies heavily on the scaling of currently non-commercially viable technologies, including CCUS, hydrogen, and negative emission technologies (NETs), as well as a 60% increase in bioenergy use.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Société Générale for maintaining high levels of fossil fuel financing despite public pledges to exit coal and reduce oil and gas exposure. The document highlights the bank's continued support for Arctic extraction, shale gas, and liquefied natural gas (LNG), as well as its use of semantic loopholes to fund coal-heavy entities like EPH.

The statement by Reclaim Finance criticizes Crédit Agricole for providing 64 billion dollars in financing to coal, oil, and gas between 2016 and 2020. It highlights that the bank remains one of the top 10 global financiers of companies active in the Arctic and has increased its support for unconventional oil and gas, including shale gas, despite public commitments to revise its policies.

Reclaim Finance argues that AXA has abandoned its climate leadership by refusing to commit to ending investments or insurance coverage for oil and gas production, including shale gas. The organization highlights AXA's reliance on collective 'net zero' alliances to avoid individual responsibility and criticizes AXA's potential support for Total's climate plan, which Reclaim Finance claims is incompatible with the 1.5°C goal. Additionally, AXA is criticized for continuing to invest in Fortum despite the pro-coal lobbying activities of its subsidiary, Uniper.

A report by Trend Asia published in 2021 arguing that Indonesia is unprepared for disasters due to government policies favoring extractive industries, mining, and coal, despite facing multiple crises including climate change and the pandemic.

ClientEarth argues that the ECB's Corporate Sector Purchase Programme (CSPP) and Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme (PEPP) exhibit a structural bias toward greenhouse gas-intensive companies, which undermines EU climate targets and increases systemic financial risk. The organization asserts that the ECB has legal obligations under EU treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights to integrate environmental protection into its monetary policy. ClientEarth proposes three specific actions: the immediate exclusion of bonds from companies incompatible with Paris Goals (including coal and unconventional oil and gas), requiring companies to adopt credible net-zero transition strategies by January 2023, and implementing annual TCFD-aligned reporting starting in 2022. The letter challenges the ECB's 'market neutral' approach, claiming it locks in high-carbon business models and fails to account for climate-related financial risks.

The report examines KKR's energy investment strategy from 2010 to 2020, highlighting a strong preference for fossil fuels over renewables. It details significant financial losses, including negative internal rates of return (IRR) for several funds and bankruptcies of assets like Longview Power and Samson Resources. Additionally, the document links KKR's investments to environmental and social harms, specifically citing Indigenous opposition to the Coastal GasLink Pipeline in Canada and the disproportionate impact of oil and gas operations on Latino and minority communities in Texas and New Mexico.

The report finds that most major asset managers maintain a gap between long-term net-zero commitments and short-term actions, with significant exposure to coal remaining in passive investment strategies. Only a small fraction of assets are covered by robust coal exclusion criteria, and passive funds are almost entirely excluded from such policies, creating a 'time bomb' for the climate.

The document argues that the US shift away from coal has occurred without adequate planning, leaving workers and communities to face economic upheaval. It proposes a support package including wage replacement, educational benefits, and community infrastructure investments, estimating the cost between $33 billion and $83 billion. The brief identifies 462 'coal counties' and highlights the need for environmental remediation of mine and plant legacies to enable future economic diversification.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Albioma's plan to convert the Bois-Rouge and Le Gol power plants on Réunion Island to 100% biomass. The organization argues that the project would increase greenhouse gas emissions, rely on unsustainable imports of wood pellets from the US or Southern Africa, and undermine the 2030 energy autonomy goal for French overseas territories. It calls on French financial institutions, including Crédit Agricole, BNP Paribas, and Société Générale, to push Albioma toward a genuine coal exit and the adoption of sustainable renewable energy instead of 'false solutions' like industrial biomass.

The document urges French financial regulators (ACPR and AMF) to implement stricter oversight of fossil fuel financing, combat greenwashing in ESG products, and integrate climate risks into prudential requirements and fiduciary duties to align the financial sector with a 1.5°C trajectory.

Reclaim Finance and Oil Change International critique the NGFS's initial climate scenarios for focusing on 2°C targets rather than 1.5°C and for relying on unrealistic levels of carbon capture. The authors contend that these choices create a bias in favor of fossil fuels, with some scenarios allowing coal use beyond 2050 and only modest reductions in fossil fuel investments. They call for a revised framework that centers a 1.5°C scenario and encourages financial regulators to end support for the fossil fuel sector.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Aviva Investors for allowing oil, gas, and mining companies up to three years to develop 'net zero' plans, arguing this delays urgent divestment. The statement highlights a contradiction where Aviva maintains investments in coal developers like BHP Group and Glencore despite a 2030 coal exit pledge. Specifically, it points to Aviva's management of a Polish pension fund with over 250 million euros in coal sector investments, including increased holdings in Enea, PGE, and CEZ in 2020, as well as investments in PGNiG.

The report examines the intersection of climate change, energy policy, and security in Southeast Asia. It identifies key vulnerabilities, including sea level rise threatening megacities and the Mekong Delta, and extreme heat reducing economic productivity. These stressors are analyzed as 'threat multipliers' that exacerbate existing geopolitical tensions in the South China Sea, fuel violent extremism through livelihood degradation, and complicate transboundary water management of the Mekong River. The document also highlights the 'energy-climate security nexus,' arguing that the region's continued reliance on coal and the pursuit of civilian nuclear power—often involving long-term partnerships with China and Russia—create new strategic risks. It concludes with a call for 'Climate Security Watch Centers,' carbon drawdown plans for ASEAN states, and a systemic shift toward renewable energy to ensure regional stability.

In 2020, renewables generated 38% of the EU's electricity, surpassing fossil-fired generation (37%) for the first time. This shift was driven primarily by wind and solar, while coal generation fell by 20% to 13% of the total mix. However, the report notes that the transition remains too slow to meet 2030 and 2050 climate targets, as gas generation remains high and nuclear output saw a record 10% decline.