Search Climate Insights Directory

The document provides a framework for Brazilian livestock producers to issue certified green bonds aligned with the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Climate Agreement. It details a three-step issuance process—pre-issuance, issuance, and post-issuance—and defines eligible projects across three routes: whole production units, specific unit interventions, and supporting activities outside the farm. To achieve certification, issuers must meet specific screening indicators, including no land conversion since 2010 and demonstrated low-carbon animal management. The guide highlights Brazil's significant role as a global livestock producer and the potential for green bonds to reduce methane emissions, which account for nearly 65% of the country's agricultural emissions.

The criteria for low carbon buildings in Peru prohibit the use of fossil fuels for HVAC, hot water, and cooking, with exceptions for emergency backup generators. Social housing certified under the Mivivienda Verde Certificate is eligible if it proves equivalence to EDGE Certification and aligns with Climate Bonds requirements for buildings constructed after January 1, 2024. Residential property upgrades are eligible if they achieve operating energy emission reductions of 30% for 5-year bonds or 50% for 30-year bonds.

The report analyzes the role of taxonomies in climate transition finance, identifying six specific mechanisms used to define and evaluate transitional activities. It examines different taxonomy archetypes—binary, traffic-light, and mixed—and provides case studies from the EU, Australia, Singapore, Rwanda, China, and others to illustrate how these mechanisms are integrated to ensure credible decarbonization pathways.

ClientEarth's feedback on the EU's Offshore Renewable Energy Strategy emphasizes the need for high environmental standards, public transparency, and regional cooperation. It argues that the strategy must adhere to the 'do no harm' principle and the precautionary principle, ensuring that the deployment of offshore wind and other ocean energies does not compromise biodiversity or ignore the rights of public participation under the Aarhus Convention. The document suggests a regional approach to grid development and targeted financial support for technologies that have not yet reached grid parity, such as wave energy.

The report concludes that EU capacity ceilings are not a major obstacle to decarbonisation, as most Member States have available room to increase gross tonnage (GT) and kilowatt (kW) capacity. It proposes a stepwise transition: first improving energy efficiency (reducing fuel use by ~30%), then adopting hybrid solutions (potentially reducing emissions by 79% combined), and finally moving toward full decarbonisation using alternative fuels like methanol. The authors argue that decommissioning fuel-inefficient vessels to combat overfishing creates a 'win-win' by freeing up capacity for the energy transition.

ClientEarth argues that the European Commission's December 2025 proposals to accelerate environmental assessments and permit-granting for infrastructure projects will lead to irreversible environmental harm and human health risks. The report claims these measures undermine the Birds and Habitats Directives, restrict access to justice, and violate the precautionary and proportionality principles of EU law. Specifically, it warns that the proposals normalize the killing of protected species, create a biased 'strategic sector' permitting regime, and restrict the ability of Member States to exclude ecologically sensitive areas from Renewable Acceleration Areas (RAAs).

The document argues that EMFAF funds are being used in ways that contradict EU environmental goals and international obligations, specifically by underfunding marine biodiversity and failing to prioritise small-scale fisheries. It highlights a systemic gap where 5–12% of funds are allocated to environmentally harmful subsidies, exceeding biodiversity spending by more than twofold. Analysis of several Member States shows that most fall far below a recommended 25% allocation for conservation and restoration. The brief also warns that proposed changes to the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) risk further diluting these priorities by removing the EMFAF as a stand-alone fund and lacking mandatory spending targets for biodiversity and the decarbonisation of the fishing fleet.

The document argues that EU governments continue to provide billions in direct and indirect fossil fuel subsidies, which undermines climate neutrality goals and the 'polluter pays' principle. It calls for a single, comprehensive definition of fossil fuel subsidies to improve transparency and accountability, and demands a bold timeline for phasing out these subsidies to shift financial support toward sustainable sectors.

The report evaluates WHA78 as a period of broadening dialogue and significant policy adoption, notably the Global Action Plan on Climate and Health (GAP) and the first pandemic agreement. While it celebrates the inclusion of youth, persons with disabilities, and mental health in the agenda, it highlights critical shortcomings, including the absence of fossil fuel phase-out language and uncertainties regarding the implementation and funding of the GAP. The document advocates for a shift in narrative, framing climate action as a strategic health investment rather than a cost, and calls for greater inclusion of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and the Global South in leadership and R&D.

The document outlines the critical intersection of climate change and public health in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), emphasizing the region's high vulnerability despite its modest global emissions contribution. It details how extreme weather, food insecurity, and the transition to clean energy impact health, particularly for marginalized groups like indigenous peoples and urban poor. The statement calls for the integration of health into National Determined Contributions (NDCs), the decarbonization of health systems and food production, and the implementation of the Belém Action Plan on Health. It advocates for climate justice, the protection of traditional knowledge, and increased financing for health-centered climate resilience.

The report 'Cradle to Grave' details how fossil fuel production, transport, and combustion cause systemic health harms across all life stages, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. It maps specific toxicants to health outcomes, analyzes the compounding risks of climate change on fossil fuel infrastructure, and documents societal harms including human rights abuses and economic instability. The document concludes with a framework for a health-focused just transition and policy recommendations to end fossil fuel exploration, subsidies, and finance.

The document identifies systemic barriers to decarbonizing Canada's electricity grid, including misaligned utility mandates, vested interests, siloed planning, and market access restrictions. It recommends implementing system-wide decarbonization mandates, technology-neutral Clean Electricity Standards, and performance-based regulation to incentivize innovation. The paper also emphasizes the need for improved interprovincial transmission and larger grid-balancing regions to integrate variable renewable energy.

The document argues that while Canada has made progress in decarbonizing power supply, achieving net-zero requires Energy Systems Integration (ESI)—the coordination of energy systems across multiple pathways and scales. It examines five key ESI technologies (electric vehicles, heat pumps, demand response, distributed generation, and hydrogen) and finds that Canadian policy is currently too siloed, relying on voluntary 'soft' incentives rather than systemic market reforms or mandatory legislation. The author highlights significant gaps in information, governance, and implementation, suggesting that a holistic, pan-system approach to modelling and planning is essential to avoid sub-optimal infrastructure lock-in.

The paper analyzes the diverse structures of Canadian provincial electricity markets, noting that a lack of coordination creates economic inefficiencies and hinders the integration of renewable energy. It identifies six primary challenges to integration, including constitutional jurisdictions and vested interests in price differentials. To address these, the author proposes four strategies: enhancing bilateral projects, adopting a bottom-up Nordic-style collaborative model, utilizing the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, or implementing a federal healthcare-type framework of shared principles.

The Canadian Climate Institute outlines a proposed framework to integrate oil and gas projects into the Sustainable Finance Action Council's (SFAC) climate investment taxonomy. To maintain scientific credibility and avoid 'greenwashing,' the report argues that only decarbonization projects within existing facilities should be eligible for the 'transition' label. It proposes a three-step eligibility process: general corporate requirements (net-zero targets), project-specific requirements (existing facility status and emission intensity alignment with 1.5°C pathways), and 'do no significant harm' criteria. A key proposal is a 50% threshold for downstream Scope 3 emissions to identify projects where demand-side risk is the primary transition risk. The report emphasizes that new oil and gas installations must be excluded to prevent carbon lock-in and align with global net-zero goals.

The document analyzes the diverse structures of Canada's provincial electricity markets, noting that a lack of coordination creates economic inefficiencies and hinders the integration of renewable energy. It identifies key barriers to integration, such as constitutional jurisdictional splits and political inertia, and proposes four strategies—bilateral collaboration, a Nordic-inspired bottom-up approach, a free-trade framework, and a health-care-style principles-based model—to foster a more integrated national grid necessary for deep decarbonization.

The report examines the current state of Energy Systems Integration (ESI) in Canada, focusing on five key technologies: electric vehicles, heat pumps, demand response, distributed generation, and hydrogen. It argues that while Canada has successfully decarbonized its electricity grid, further progress requires coordinating energy vectors and scales. The author identifies significant barriers, including fragmented governance, a lack of integrated modeling, and a policy landscape dominated by voluntary 'soft' incentives rather than systemic mandates. The document recommends replacing sectoral subsidies with market reforms that remunerate grid flexibility and implementing integrated modeling platforms to guide coordinated infrastructure investments.

The document identifies several systemic obstacles hindering the deployment of clean energy technologies in Canada, including misaligned mandates, market access restrictions, and outdated information. It argues that the highly centralized and regulated nature of the Canadian grid creates a path dependency that favors fossil fuels and large-scale hydro over innovative solutions like energy storage and distributed renewables. To overcome these, the report recommends implementing clear decarbonization mandates, adopting performance-based regulation, improving interprovincial transmission infrastructure, and utilizing carbon pricing to shift investment toward zero-emission resources.

The document provides an overview of nuclear energy as a low-carbon, high-capacity power source, detailing its current contribution to the U.S. electricity mix and the challenges facing its growth. It highlights the aging state of the U.S. nuclear fleet, the lack of a permanent radioactive waste disposal solution, and the high costs and delays associated with new construction. The brief also explores emerging technologies, such as Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Generation IV reactors, as potential paths to maintain nuclear power's role in a decarbonized economy.

The document outlines China's '1+N climate framework' and its goals to peak carbon emissions by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. It identifies five key intervention areas for systemic transformation: power generation, energy distribution networks, transport, carbon sinks, and technology/energy policy. The authors argue that international collaboration, knowledge sharing, and philanthropic funding—which averaged $75 million per year between 2017 and 2020—can help overcome technical and financial barriers, create economies of scale for clean technologies, and improve the efficiency of China's national emissions trading scheme (ETS).