Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of ocean warming and acidification, while offering strategic advice for journalists to move beyond reactive coverage toward sustained, justice-oriented reporting on marine ecosystems.

The report argues that the climate crisis is fundamentally linked to 'mimetic desire,' where individuals pursue luxury goods and status symbols not for their utility, but to emulate others. This cycle of conspicuous consumption fuels unsustainable economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions. The author explores various philosophical and economic responses, including degrowth communism, minimalism, and the concept of 'Buen Vivir,' while concluding that neither perpetual growth nor utopian degrowth fully resolves the tension between fulfilling essential human needs and maintaining planetary boundaries. The text identifies a 'climate–development trilemma' where societal stability, basic needs, and resource efficiency are in constant conflict.

The document provides a comprehensive critique of geoengineering, categorizing it into carbon removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM). It details specific failures and risks of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS/CCUS), Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS), Direct Air Capture (DAC), and marine geoengineering across various global regions, emphasizing that these 'false solutions' often facilitate continued fossil fuel extraction through Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) and pose significant ecological and social threats.

Global Witness analyzed 45 bot-like accounts on X, finding that many consistently spread climate disinformation and conspiracy theories. These accounts often frame climate action as a 'scam' or a tool for elite control, linking climate denial to other divisive political stances. The report highlights the difficulty of verifying account authenticity due to limited data transparency from social media platforms like X.

The statement supports the Special Rapporteur's mapping report, specifically its focus on fossil fuels, loss and damage, and the risks associated with geoengineering and carbon credits. It calls for further investigation into human rights violations across the entire fossil fuel lifecycle to support a just transition and emphasizes the necessity of an intersectional approach to protect marginalized groups.

The document argues that States have a legal obligation under international climate change law and human rights law to implement effective, science-based measures to mitigate climate change, specifically through the phase-out of fossil fuels and the regulation of non-state actors. It asserts that failure to do so constitutes an internationally wrongful act, triggering responsibilities for cessation of harm and full reparation, including financial compensation for loss and damage.

The document outlines the necessity of a Global Just Transition to phase out fossil fuels by 2050, emphasizing the disproportionate economic burden on developing nations. It proposes a framework for financing this transition through new multilateral funds, the redirection of USD 5.9 trillion in annual fossil fuel subsidies, and systemic reforms to debt, taxation, and international financial institutions.

The paper examines the security implications of geoengineering, distinguishing between long-term risks of unilateral deployment and near-term risks involving geopolitical competition and misinformation. It highlights how a lack of trust between the Global North and South, combined with strategic competition between powers like the US, China, and Russia, could lead to states attributing natural disasters to perceived geoengineering attempts. Drawing on historical examples like Project Popeye and the 1978 ENMOD treaty, the author argues against a total ban on geoengineering, suggesting instead that the US lead the development of transparent, civilian-led guardrails and robust science diplomacy to mitigate these risks while continuing the transition from fossil fuels.

The statement emphasizes the necessity of a human rights-based approach to environmental policies, arguing that climate action must be scientifically proven, address root causes like fossil fuel phase-out, and ensure the participation of affected communities—particularly Indigenous Peoples—in the assessment of geoengineering risks. It also warns against the distortion of scientific discourse by vested interests, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The guide outlines how to detect greenwashing by analyzing emissions data, target setting, and the use of controversial technologies. It emphasizes the importance of absolute emissions over intensity targets and warns against the over-reliance on carbon offsets, natural gas, and unproven carbon removal technologies.

The document examines the ecological and human rights risks of various geoengineering approaches, asserting that these speculative technologies could lead to ecosystem collapse and perpetuate neocolonialism.

The brief provides scientific and legal arguments to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, asserting that the climate emergency constitutes a threat to fundamental human rights. It emphasizes that States have a positive obligation to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions based on the best available science, specifically the 1.5°C target. The document argues that this duty includes regulating 'Carbon Majors' and avoiding 'false solutions' like carbon offsetting and unproven geoengineering, which may undermine genuine decarbonization. It concludes that failure to take effective, science-based action violates the rights to life, health, and a healthy environment, particularly for marginalized groups and future generations.

The document is a curated list of resources published between 2005 and 2023 that challenge the validity and ethics of various climate mitigation strategies. It categorizes these resources into reports and briefings, blogs, articles, press releases, and other media. The listed materials focus on the perceived dangers of carbon markets, geoengineering, and corporate-led 'net zero' strategies, often framing them as 'false solutions' that may facilitate continued fossil fuel use or result in 'green colonialism'.

The document is a resource list compiled by Friends of the Earth International, cataloguing various publications that challenge the legitimacy of 'false climate solutions'. It highlights materials focusing on the risks of net-zero targets, nature-based solutions, carbon markets, and geoengineering, often linking these mechanisms to land grabbing and corporate greenwashing.

The Center for International Environmental Law asserts that geoengineering technologies, including solar radiation modification and carbon dioxide removal, are unproven, unfeasible at scale, and violate human rights obligations. The organization warns that these technologies are being used as excuses to avoid phasing out fossil fuels and notes that unregulated experiments often occur on Indigenous Peoples' territories without consent. It advocates for a rapid, fair fossil fuel phase-out and the adoption of a global binding instrument via the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty initiative to limit global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

The document synthesizes expert warnings that geoengineering technologies, including carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM), pose unprecedented risks to human rights and may act as a 'moral hazard' by delaying the necessary phase-out of fossil fuels. It highlights that these technologies are largely unproven and unfeasible at scale, with potential for disproportionate harm to Indigenous Peoples, rural communities, and future generations. The brief advocates for a rights-based approach to climate action that prioritizes immediate emissions reductions and the application of the precautionary principle, suggesting that some high-risk activities, such as stratospheric aerosol injection, may warrant a complete ban.

The Center for International Environmental Law argues that industrial food production is deeply linked to the fossil fuel industry through the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, which release greenhouse gases and may impair soil carbon sequestration. The statement warns that geoengineering technologies, such as solar radiation modification and large-scale carbon removal, pose risks to weather patterns, ecosystems, and food security. It calls for a rapid end to fossil fuel reliance and a transition to regenerative agricultural models that protect the rights of land and environmental defenders, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

The document describes the ocean as the planet's largest carbon sink, sequestering approximately 26% of human-released CO2 annually. It details the biological and physical carbon pumps, the role of large marine mammals and coastal ecosystems in 'blue carbon' storage, and evaluates emerging geoengineering approaches for carbon dioxide removal (CDR). The brief emphasizes that while ocean-based solutions build resilience and biodiversity, they must be paired with rapid emissions cuts to effectively slow global warming.

Friends of the Earth International proposes a framework for 'system change' to address the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and social inequality. The document identifies five primary pathways for transformation: gender justice, energy sovereignty, food sovereignty, community forest management, and a regenerative economy. It critiques 'false solutions'—such as carbon markets and geoengineering—that allow corporations to profit while maintaining harmful structures. The report emphasizes the role of grassroots movements, the reclamation of the state for the common good, and internationalist solidarity to dismantle corporate power and patriarchy.

The report by Friends of the Earth International outlines a framework for systemic change to address the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and social inequality. It identifies neoliberal capitalism, patriarchy, and colonialism as the root causes of these crises and proposes 'people's solutions' centered on gender justice, democratic energy systems, food sovereignty, community forest management, and a distributive economy. The document emphasizes the need to dismantle corporate power and reclaim political agency to ensure a future based on social, environmental, and gender justice.