Search Climate Insights Directory

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) recommends that the DOE prioritize a limited number of large-scale hydrogen hubs (4 to 6) to avoid program dilution and maximize industrial learning. CATF emphasizes the need for full lifecycle analysis (LCA) to measure greenhouse gas intensity, noting that natural gas with carbon capture can reach 1.5 to 2.0 kgCO2e/kgH2, while solar-powered electrolyzers range from 0.96 to 2.52 kgCO2e/kgH2 when upstream emissions are included. The document argues for prioritizing 'difficult-to-electrify' sectors such as heavy-duty trucking, marine shipping, and heavy industry. To ensure equity, CATF suggests requiring comprehensive community environmental health assessments and implementing inclusive engagement strategies to protect disadvantaged communities from industrial pollution.

The document presents nuclear energy as a critical, low-carbon complement to renewables for meeting growing global electricity demand, specifically within Central and Eastern Europe. It highlights the region's existing nuclear infrastructure and the potential for new deployments to achieve EU climate-neutrality goals. The text addresses safety, waste management, and costs, noting that while upfront capital expenditures are high, nuclear power is among the safest and cleanest energy sources available.

The document asserts that natural gas is not a clean energy source, detailing how its production, transport, and combustion cause significant environmental degradation and health issues. It highlights the potency of methane leaks and the high carbon emissions from LNG and gas-to-power plants, particularly in the South African context. The author recommends a holistic lifecycle impact assessment to counter the misconception that gas is a viable strategy for reducing emissions.

The document outlines the systemic health risks associated with the full life cycle of plastics, from fossil fuel extraction to waste management. It highlights that 99% of plastics originate from fossil fuels and that exposure to associated toxic chemicals occurs via inhalation, ingestion, and skin contact. The report emphasizes that current fragmented research is insufficient and calls for a precautionary approach, increased transparency regarding chemical additives, and a global reduction in plastic production to mitigate risks such as cancer, endocrine disruption, and neurotoxicity.

The report details how plastic exposure occurs at every stage of its life cycle—from extraction and refining to consumer use and waste management—releasing toxic chemicals and microplastics that cause severe health issues including cancer and endocrine disruption. It calls for a shift from fragmented assessments to a comprehensive life-cycle approach, increased transparency regarding chemical additives, and a global reduction in plastic production.

The document provides a detailed mapping between the Climate Bonds Buildings Standard and the EU Taxonomy, specifically for building acquisition, new construction, and renovation. It concludes that Climate Bonds requirements are often a "Higher standard" than the EU Taxonomy, particularly regarding operational performance verification and emission reductions. The guide also details how Climate Bonds' DNSH requirements align with EU legislation for climate adaptation, water protection, circular economy, and pollution control.

The Bioenergy Criteria Background document outlines the framework for certifying bioenergy projects as climate-aligned. It establishes a temporal declining trajectory for life-cycle GHG emissions, aiming for near-zero emissions by 2050. The document defines eligible biomass feedstocks—categorized into agricultural, forestry, processing waste, and aquatic biomass—and sets strict sustainability requirements to prevent negative impacts on biodiversity, food security, and carbon stocks. Special emphasis is placed on mitigating methane emissions in the biogas and biomethane value chain through the adoption of 'best-practice' scenarios and leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs. Additionally, it provides a framework for assessing the adaptation and resilience of bioenergy assets against climate-related hazards.

Carbon Market Watch argues that Gold Standard's proposed methodology for crediting the early retirement of coal plants lacks the necessary rigor to ensure additionality and environmental integrity. The organization expresses skepticism that carbon credit finance is a suitable tool for this purpose given the volatility of energy markets and the difficulty of accurately measuring the future viability of coal plants. Specific concerns include the risk of double claiming, vague definitions of 'baseline plants' that might include economically unviable facilities, and the failure to account for the lifecycle emissions of new renewable energy plants.

The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation (ICSA) evaluates the 'CORSIA Package,' which includes Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) for the global aviation carbon offsetting scheme. While acknowledging the technical soundness of much of the package, ICSA argues that current provisions for reporting transparency, emissions unit eligibility, and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) sustainability criteria are insufficient. The document recommends that ICAO expand sustainability criteria to include social and economic attributes, improve third-party access to emissions reports, and refine life cycle assessment (LCA) values for waste-based feedstocks to prevent environmental harm and double counting.

The document outlines how procurement professionals can leverage their purchasing power to reduce climate impact and increase business resilience. It suggests selecting suppliers with science-based emissions targets, optimizing logistics for efficiency, and collaborating with designers on circular product development. The guide emphasizes that sustainable procurement can lead to revenue increases of 5–20 percent and supply chain cost reductions of 9–16 percent, while also providing a mechanism to integrate diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice strategies through supplier diversity programs.

The document outlines how product managers can drive sustainable innovation by incorporating climate criteria into product life cycles, prioritizing energy efficiency and circularity, and influencing organizational culture. It emphasizes the business case for sustainability, noting that in 2022, sustainable products accounted for at least half of recent purchases for 60% of customers.

The document asserts that wood biomass power in Japan and South Korea is not carbon neutral and often emits more CO2 than coal. It criticizes the use of subsidies—such as Japan's FIT system and South Korea's REC system—to support these facilities, arguing that such policies prolong the operation of coal plants and divert investment from wind and solar energy. The report highlights safety risks, including fires and explosions, and notes that the carbon debt of wood biomass can take 44 to 104 years to repay.

The document provides the curriculum for two training sessions focused on health system decarbonization and climate resilience. Session 7 focuses on greenhouse gas emissions scopes, life-cycle analysis, and emission reduction opportunities. Session 8 focuses on defining climate-resilient, low-carbon, and carbon-neutral health systems, utilizing the WHO framework and indicators for monitoring and evaluation across key areas such as financing, workforce, and governance.

The document highlights how current life cycle assessments (LCA) in the Canadian built environment can mislead decision-makers due to data gaps and a lack of transparency. It specifically notes that LCAs often ignore biogenic carbon emissions from wood products—which can account for up to 72% of a product's total life cycle emissions—and overlook regional variations in material production and disposal. The briefing recommends that the federal government invest in updated regional and national LCA inventories and prioritizes energy efficiency and material longevity as the primary drivers for decarbonizing buildings.

The SAVi analysis demonstrates that while a coal power plant appears more profitable under a Business-as-Usual (BAU) scenario, the offshore wind farm becomes the superior financial option when externalities and climate risks are integrated. Specifically, accounting for externalities reduces the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for offshore wind to EUR 65 per MWh compared to EUR 171 per MWh for coal. When physical risks (1.5°C temperature increase) and transitional risks (a carbon tax of EUR 16.27/MWh) are added, the coal plant's internal rate of return (IRR) drops to 0%, while the wind farm maintains an IRR of approximately 17%. The analysis also estimates that the offshore wind project would create 2,780 full-time equivalent jobs.

The report argues that natural gas is more damaging to the climate than coal over a 20-year period due to potent methane leaks throughout its lifecycle. It highlights that 'top-down' measurements using satellites and aircraft reveal significantly higher emissions than traditional 'bottom-up' estimates. The author notes that shale gas and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) further increase these emissions, making gas expansion incompatible with a livable climate. This analysis is applied to the proposed Richards Bay power plant, which may source gas from the Karoo basin or via LNG imports from the US or Australia.

The document explains that buildings contribute at least 39% of annual global energy-related carbon emissions, with at least one-quarter of those stemming from embodied carbon associated with materials and construction. It argues that developers can reduce these emissions by prioritizing the reuse of existing buildings over new construction and by setting clear environmental goals for project teams. To balance financial returns with environmental certifications, the text recommends six strategies: building less (prioritizing redevelopment), building collaboratively (using LCAs and inventories), building for longevity (adaptability and deconstruction), following data (requesting EPDs), reducing waste, and considering carbon offsetting.

The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) conducted a life cycle analysis (LCA) using the Argonne National Laboratories' GREET model to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Toyota Prius and the Hummer H3. RMI tested four scenarios, manipulating vehicle lifespan and assembly energy requirements to see if the conclusions of a CNW Research/Marketing report—which claimed the Prius was more harmful to the environment—could be replicated. RMI found that the Prius consistently has a lower environmental impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, regardless of whether assembly energy for the Prius was tripled or if the Hummer was assigned a longer lifespan (207,000 miles) compared to the Prius (109,000 miles). The report concludes that vehicle operation dominates emissions due to the Hummer's poor fuel economy, and that the CNW findings diverge significantly from scientifically reviewed work.

The W-Fuel project investigated the feasibility of producing biomethane from locally sourced biodegradable waste, sludge, manure, and energy crops in northern Estonia. The study focused on two pilot sites: the Hinnu pig farm in Harju County and a proposed plant in Rakvere, Lääne-Viru County. Findings indicate that while CHP production may be more commercially profitable due to existing feed-in tariffs, upgrading biogas to biomethane for transport fuel is more socially and environmentally beneficial, particularly when accounting for the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). The report also provides detailed biomass availability forecasts for 2020 and recommends specific waste prevention measures and governmental support schemes to facilitate the transition to gaseous renewable fuels.

The document serves as a technical support guide for the LEAP software, offering instructions on optimizing calculation speeds, troubleshooting electricity generation modules, and clarifying the software's capabilities regarding GHG inventories and life cycle analysis. It also explains specific data entry functions, such as the distinction between exogenous and endogenous capacity and the use of share versus saturation units in demand analysis.