Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that early action on just energy transitions can minimize negative impacts on workers and communities while maximizing opportunities in low-carbon sectors. It outlines a 'How-To' framework consisting of four key stages: understanding the political economy context, identifying champions, making the case through inclusive communication, and implementing complementary policies such as retraining and economic diversification. The document emphasizes that a just transition is not a fixed set of rules but a negotiated process based on social dialogue and tripartism. Through case studies, it demonstrates various approaches: Canada's use of a high-level Task Force, Egypt and Indonesia's reallocation of fossil fuel subsidies into social and infrastructure programs, and Poland's use of 'golden handshakes' and regional support for mining communes. It concludes that overcoming 'carbon lock-in' requires transparent communication, tangible short-term benefits, and the mobilization of dedicated funding from sources like energy taxes or subsidy reforms.

The We Mean Business Coalition urges governments at COP24 to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy by setting bold targets and clear timelines. The coalition emphasizes the need for a just transition involving tripartite social dialogue and investment in worker retraining. Specifically, it calls for full government participation in the Talanoa Dialogue to update nationally determined contribution (NDC) targets and the creation of a strong Paris rulebook featuring a global stocktake, common NDC implementation periods, an enhanced transparency framework, and guidelines to protect carbon market integrity.

The document outlines various mechanisms through which G20 nations can redirect public money—including subsidies, tax revenues, state-owned enterprise investments, and credit support—away from fossil fuels. It highlights specific national and regional successes, such as Indonesia's subsidy reforms and the EU's phase-out of coal mining subsidies, while emphasizing the need for a faster transition that protects vulnerable groups and ensures a just transition for workers.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing the Life After Coal/Impilo Ngaphandle Kwamalahle Campaign, is urging the South African government to prioritise the promulgation of the Climate Change Bill, 2018. The authors argue that delaying climate legislation is unacceptable given South Africa's extreme vulnerability to climate change and the urgent need for 'rapid and far-reaching' transitions to limit global warming to 1.5°C. They assert that the state has a Constitutional obligation to protect the environment and prevent pollution, citing the Dutch Urgenda case as a legal precedent for the state's duty to pursue ambitious greenhouse gas emission reduction plans.

The report finds that ten companies were responsible for an estimated two-thirds of the health damage caused by EU coal power plants in 2016, including 7,600 premature deaths. RWE is identified as the most harmful company, with health costs of €5.4 billion in 2016. The analysis highlights that for many companies, the health costs imposed on society are similar in magnitude to the revenues they earn from selling coal-fired electricity. The report argues that companies are 'clinging to coal' through lack of retirement plans, continued investment in old plants, and lobbying for subsidies, and recommends a full phase-out of coal by 2030.

The Life After Coal Campaign urges the South African Minister of Finance to withhold guarantees for the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal-fired power stations. The campaign argues these projects fail 'value for money' tests, violate the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA), and would cause irreversible harm to the climate and public health. They highlight that the projects are not part of a least-cost electricity plan and would increase greenhouse gas emissions by 205.7Mt CO2eq over 30 years, potentially exposing the National Treasury to liabilities between R25.2 billion and R225.2 billion.

The report finds that G20 countries are not on track to meet Paris Agreement goals, with energy-related CO2 emissions increasing again in 2017 and 82% of energy supply still coming from fossil fuels. It highlights significant gaps in sectoral actions—particularly in power, transport, and industry—and notes that fossil fuel subsidies in the G20 nearly doubled between 2007 and 2016. While some countries are implementing 'just transition' initiatives for workers, others lack dialogue or action.

The document outlines ten core demands for a just energy transition, emphasizing that energy should be treated as a common good rather than a commodity. It calls for the dismantling of capitalist and patriarchal systems of oppression, the repayment of climate debt by developed nations to the global South, and the prioritisation of small-scale, decentralised renewable technologies. The manifesto advocates for 'energy sufficiency' to end overconsumption by elites while ensuring universal access for the poor, and insists on a just transition that protects the rights and livelihoods of energy sector workers.

The document outlines ten demands for transforming the global energy system, emphasizing the need to dismantle capitalist and patriarchal structures to achieve energy sovereignty. It advocates for a transition to 100% renewable energy based on decentralized, small-scale technologies and the redistribution of climate finance from the Global North to the Global South to address historical ecological debts.

The document outlines ten demands for a systemic change in the global energy landscape, emphasizing that energy should be treated as a common good rather than a commodity. It advocates for 'energy sufficiency' to eliminate overconsumption by elites while ensuring universal access to basic energy needs. The manifesto calls for a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy, specifically prioritizing small-scale, decentralized technologies over large-scale projects that may cause land grabbing or biodiversity loss. It emphasizes a 'just transition' that protects workers' rights and addresses historical climate debts owed by the Global North to the Global South. Central to its argument is the concept of energy sovereignty, where communities—particularly women and marginalized groups—have democratic control over their energy production and use.

The document examines the scale of public money supporting fossil fuels in G20 countries and presents case studies of reforms to align these flows with the Paris Agreement and Sustainable Development Goals. It highlights the use of consumption and production subsidy removals, increased taxation, and the diversification of state-owned enterprise investments. The paper argues that shifting these resources can create fiscal space for social protection, health, and clean energy, while recommending that G20 nations adopt ambitious reform timelines and protect vulnerable groups during the transition.

The report examines how G20 countries can shift public funds away from fossil fuels through subsidy reform, increased taxation, and the redirection of state-owned enterprise investments. It highlights specific national examples, such as Indonesia's consumption subsidy reform and the EU's transition funds, while arguing that the current scale of public support for fossil fuels hinders decarbonization and sustainable development.

The commentary argues that the IRP 2018 is a form of 'climate denial' that lacks a meaningful carbon constraint and continues to prioritize coal and gas over cheaper, cleaner renewables. It highlights the severe health costs of air pollution from Eskom and criticizes the public consultation process as exclusionary. The authors advocate for a total phase-out of coal, the rejection of new extractive gas projects, and a transition to a socially owned renewable energy system that creates jobs and ensures energy justice for the poor.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) argues that the draft IRP 2018 is unlawful and irrational because it includes 6,732MW of new coal capacity despite its own findings that a least-cost plan would exclude coal. The CER highlights severe failures in the draft, including inflated electricity demand forecasts, outdated and high cost assumptions for renewables and battery storage, and a total lack of consideration for water and climate change externalities. The document specifically objects to the Thabametsi and Khanyisa coal projects, citing their high emissions and risks to water resources in the Waterberg and Highveld regions. Furthermore, the CER criticizes the Department of Energy for failing to conduct meaningful public consultations with impacted communities and for withholding the Plexos modelling data necessary for transparent stakeholder review.

The We Mean Business Coalition argues that vague NDCs hinder the ability of the private sector to invest in a clean energy economy. The coalition calls for the standardization of data—including base years, target years, and IPCC methodologies—and requests clarity on the domestic legislation and financial measures intended to implement these targets to ensure a just transition and a predictable regulatory environment.

The We Mean Business coalition argues that while nearly 500 companies have set science-based emission reduction targets, stronger government policies are required to drive further business action. The coalition recommends specific interventions across zero-carbon grids, fleets, buildings, and agriculture, alongside broader systemic reforms including the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, the implementation of carbon pricing, and the adoption of TCFD disclosure requirements. The document emphasizes that these policies will provide the clarity and confidence businesses need for low-carbon capital investment and a just transition for workers.

The document outlines how to apply a gender and social equality (GSE) lens to sustainable development research to uncover power relations and inequalities. It defines key concepts such as intersectionality, the distinction between sex and gender, and the role of social constructions in creating hierarchies. The guide provides a framework for analyzing norms, division of labour, resource access, and decision-making power, while offering specific methodological advice for defining research questions, collecting data from diverse social groups, and presenting results to ensure the voices of marginalized populations are represented.

The Crawford Generating Station in Chicago closed in 2012 following community organizing by the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization (LVEJO). While a 2012 memorandum of understanding required stakeholder input for redevelopment, Hilco Redevelopment Partners announced plans in 2018 to build a logistics facility, which LVEJO opposes due to the risk of increased diesel pollution. The Union of Concerned Scientists proposes an alternative: a 10 megawatt solar farm and a 10 megawatt energy storage installation, leveraging the site's existing grid infrastructure and brownfield status under the Future Energy Jobs Act.

The E.D. Edwards Power Station in Illinois faces an uncertain future as its owner, Dynegy-Vistra, seeks state bailouts and relaxed pollution rules. The document argues that retiring the plant would improve public health and save consumers money, while the 206-acre site could be repurposed for a 41-megawatt solar farm and energy storage. However, a significant challenge remains in the form of high-hazard coal ash storage on-site.

The Waukegan Generating Station in Illinois causes significant health harms, including an estimated 18 premature deaths annually, and disproportionately affects people of color. Analysis indicates that the plant's coal units can be retired without impacting electricity reliability, as generation can be replaced across the PJM regional transmission organization. The document proposes a just transition involving site remediation, energy storage, and the use of nearby brownfield sites for solar projects under the Future Energy Jobs Act (FEJA).