Search Climate Insights Directory

Young people in Italy face a structural crisis characterized by precarious employment, high poverty rates, and a lack of social housing, which prevents them from achieving independence. The document highlights that 11% of young people aged 18-34 lived in absolute poverty in 2021, and the average age for leaving the parental home is 29.9 years. This economic instability is compounded by a political class that the author argues ignores youth needs, leading to high electoral abstention and a vacuum filled by right-wing rhetoric. The resulting insecurity is linked to deteriorating mental health, including anxious-depression and social isolation.

The author contends that Europe's energy scarcity is a long-term reality that cannot be solved by new fossil fuels or nuclear power, necessitating a shift toward 'energy sobriety'. This approach distinguishes itself from energy efficiency by focusing on the fair distribution of energy reduction rather than technical innovation. The text explores historical precedents for rationing in France and the Netherlands to argue that collective sufficiency is feasible. Proposed mechanisms for a just transition include progressive energy tariffs—where essential use is cheap and misuse is expensive—and personal carbon quotas to ensure equitable distribution and prevent social conflict during the energy transition.

The island of Ventotene has established a renewable energy community to combat rising energy costs and foster local autonomy. Initiated during the pandemic by a PhD student and supported by the local government, the project aims to transform residents from consumers into 'prosumers' who own and share local energy production. The community emphasizes a redistributive model where businesses with high solar capacity, such as hotels, can support individuals and small businesses. Despite its success as a 'laboratory for innovation,' the project faced delays due to Italian legislative instability and technical grid connection issues. The case highlights a broader Italian context where 38 communities are recognized and 65 are planned, supported by EU funding via the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, though Italy remains behind some European neighbors in implementation speed.

The Institute for Economic Justice criticizes the $8.5-billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa, arguing that its reliance on loans and private-sector 'de-risking' rather than grants will increase energy costs and benefit foreign investors while neglecting local manufacturing and worker protections. The document further condemns the secretive nature of the negotiations, which it claims undermines procedural justice and excludes key stakeholders.

The Institute for Economic Justice argues that South Africa's JETP is a flawed climate finance model that relies heavily on loans rather than grants, benefiting private Independent Power Producers (IPPs) while leaving the state with the financial risk. The author contends that the deal lacks transparency, fails to adequately fund the localization of the renewable energy value chain, and provides insufficient social security for workers in the coal belt.

The policy brief argues that the USD 8.5 billion Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) in South Africa relies on a 'de-risking' model that prioritises private finance and Independent Power Producers (IPPs), shifting commercial risks to the state and consumers. This approach is criticised for potentially worsening South Africa's debt profile, increasing energy poverty through higher tariffs, and undermining local renewable energy manufacturing. The authors suggest alternatives including the regulation of PPPs, debt cancellation of 'odious debt' (such as World Bank loans for the Medupi plant), climate reparations, and the implementation of allocative green credit policies to direct investment toward productive, labour-intensive green industries.

The document critiques the South African JETP for prioritising blended finance and public-private partnerships (PPPs), which the authors argue shifts commercial risk to the state while privatising gains. It highlights how this model can increase energy poverty through higher tariffs and hinder local renewable energy manufacturing. The brief suggests alternatives such as regulating private finance, pursuing debt cancellation and climate reparations, and implementing allocative green credit policies.

The document opposes the push for new gas infrastructure in Africa, which it describes as a short-term solution for European energy security that risks irreversible climate disaster. It highlights the disproportionate impact of climate change on Africa, the environmental damage caused by gas extraction in Nigeria and Mozambique, and the inadequacy of 'net zero' pledges. The authors call for an immediate end to fossil fuel financing and the implementation of a 100% renewable energy goal for Africa by 2050, funded by climate debt repayments from the Global North.

The document opposes the promotion of natural gas as a 'transition fuel' in Africa, arguing that such projects primarily benefit European energy security and corporate profits while exacerbating climate vulnerability and poverty on the continent. It highlights the environmental damage in the Niger Delta and Cabo Delgado, criticizes 'Net Zero' as greenwashing, and proposes a 100% renewable energy target for Africa by 2050. The authors call for an end to fossil fuel financing and demand an annual climate debt payment of $2 trillion from industrialized nations to fund loss, damage, and a just transition.

The document warns against a surge of new LNG terminal projects in Europe triggered by the energy crisis following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It argues these projects will not solve short-term energy shortages due to construction delays and market constraints, while risking long-term 'carbon lock-in' and increased methane emissions. The author specifically criticizes the opacity of the Le Havre floating terminal project and calls on private financial institutions, including GFANZ members, to implement exclusions for LNG infrastructure to align with 1.5°C warming targets.

The document warns against the proliferation of LNG import terminals in Europe, arguing they will not solve the immediate energy crisis and will create long-term fossil fuel dependency. It calls on private financial institutions to deny funding for these projects to prevent carbon lock-in and mitigate methane emissions.

The report argues that the gas industry is pushing hydrogen heating to avoid a 'death spiral' as consumers switch to electric heat pumps. It claims that converting gas grids to hydrogen could cost European users €240bn and that 'hydrogen ready' boilers are a greenwashing tactic to lock in fossil gas use. The document highlights that hydrogen combustion emits dangerous nitrogen oxides (NOx), contrary to industry marketing, and that heat pumps are significantly more cost-effective and efficient than hydrogen-based heating.

The report analyzes how 'climateflation', 'fossilflation', and 'greenflation' impact price stability and proposes that the ECB align its operations with EU climate goals, implement green lending facilities for building renovation, and coordinate with the EIB and European Commission to fund a just energy transition.

The report contends that Europe's rapid expansion of LNG import capacity in response to the Russian gas crisis is disproportionate and environmentally damaging. It argues that new terminals will not address short-term energy needs due to long construction timelines, will create carbon lock-in, and increase methane emissions, particularly from US shale gas. The author asserts that existing capacity is sufficient to meet demand under net-zero scenarios and that funds should instead be diverted to renewable energy and energy efficiency to avoid worsening energy poverty and impacting the Global South.

RMI's analysis of historical data reveals that the US federal government grossly underfunds the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), with funding needing to increase 10 to 20 times above 2021 levels to cover all eligible families. Significant gaps in service exist, particularly in California and Texas, driven by both funding shortages and barriers to access such as lack of awareness and complex application procedures. While recent legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act provides targeted funds for weatherization and efficiency, RMI argues for a comprehensive approach that centers community-based organizations to resolve underlying energy justice issues.

The case study describes the installation of an off-grid solar photovoltaic system in the village of Ned, Datal Bonglangon, in South Cotabato, Philippines. Supported by the Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center and Friends of the Earth International, the project provides essential lighting to 46 of 60 planned households and a community charging station. The initiative is framed as a move toward energy sovereignty for the T’boli-Manobo people, who face threats from industrial coffee plantations and proposed coal power plants, and as a model for low-carbon development in remote areas.

The author contends that high fossil-fuel prices are essential market drivers for energy efficiency and the shift to renewables. To prevent social instability and energy poverty, the document proposes that EU governments avoid capping fuel prices and instead provide direct, inflation-linked compensation for heating, cooling, and food costs. Long-term recommendations include removing fossil-fuel subsidies, implementing a common EU carbon tax, expanding mass public transport, and shifting toward mission-oriented budgeting and ecological tax reform.

The document analyzes the collapse of Sri Lanka in 2022, attributing the crisis to the corruption of the Rajapaksa family, a massive international debt burden, and failed neoliberal policies. It details how the ban on chemical fertilizers caused food insecurity, how dependence on fossil fuels led to energy poverty, and how 'debt-for-nature' swaps are viewed as false solutions. The text highlights a severe humanitarian crisis where millions require immediate assistance and calls for a systemic change, debt cancellation, and a just energy transition.

The Social Climate Fund is designed to support vulnerable households, micro-enterprises, and transport users during the EU's transition to climate neutrality by 2050. It focuses on building renovations, renewable energy expansion, and low-emission mobility. The document outlines varying financial proposals, including a potential envelope of EUR 23.7 billion for 2025-2027 and EUR 48.5 billion for 2028-2032, while emphasizing the need for national Social Climate Plans and the inclusion of 'mobility poverty' definitions.

The document examines the socio-economic risks associated with the EU's 'Fit for 55' package, specifically the introduction of ETS2. It argues that carbon pricing alone is insufficient to drive decarbonization and may disproportionately affect low-income rural households. While the Social Climate Fund provides a mechanism for compensation and investment, the authors suggest a broader approach including digitalization, subnational capacity building, and structural inequality reforms is necessary for a fair transition.