Search Climate Insights Directory

The policy brief argues that current menstrual health policies often oversimplify sustainability by focusing solely on the waste generated by disposable products. It recommends that policymakers adopt a comprehensive framework that considers local contexts, the impact of climate change on water accessibility, the need for standardized product quality, and the socio-economic barriers that influence product choice and disposal practices.

The Clean Air Task Force asserts that assigning negative emissions rates to biomethane, such as those used in the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard, would allow hydrogen producers to meet 45V tax credit thresholds by blending small amounts of biomethane with fossil natural gas instead of investing in carbon capture. The author contends this would reward environmentally harmful practices, create market distortions, and promote 'dirty' hydrogen production through steam methane reforming (SMR) without carbon capture.

The document defines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as the physical extraction and permanent storage of atmospheric CO2. It argues that CDR must supplement, not substitute, deep emission reductions of over 90%. The handbook evaluates six negative emissions technologies and practices (NETPs)—biochar, BioCCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering, afforestation/reforestation, and soil carbon sequestration—detailing their technical readiness, permanence, and environmental trade-offs. It emphasizes the need for robust 'cradle-to-grave' carbon accounting, separate targets for reductions and removals to avoid mitigation deterrence, and the integration of the Planetary Boundaries framework to ensure Earth system stability. The text also critiques current EU legislation, such as the Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF) and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), for lacking ambition and failing to distinguish between permanent and temporary storage.

The document defines carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as the physical extraction of CO2 from the atmosphere and its permanent storage. It argues that CDR must be a complement to, not a substitute for, aggressive emission reductions (over 90%). The guide evaluates six negative emissions technologies and practices (NETPs)—including Bio-CCS, DACCS, and biochar—while critiquing current EU policies for failing to distinguish between permanent removals and temporary biological sequestration. It advocates for a diversified portfolio of CDR methods, rigorous life-cycle accounting, and a governance framework based on the 'planetary boundaries' to avoid ecological trade-offs.

The document evaluates three industry-proposed methods for reducing carbon emissions from gas plants: hydrogen cofiring, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and biomethane. It concludes that these approaches often fail to achieve targeted emissions reductions when full life cycle impacts—such as upstream methane leakage, energy penalties, and production emissions—are considered. Furthermore, the brief argues that these technologies perpetuate environmental and social inequities by maintaining the operation of gas plants. In contrast, the report finds that transitioning to renewable energy sources like wind and solar provides superior reductions in carbon, air, and water pollution while offering lower costs and fewer land-use impacts.

The Clean Air Task Force asserts that diverting vegetable oils to the energy sector can create supply gaps filled by carbon-intensive palm oil, effectively bypassing the intent of section 45Z. It highlights that while palm oil is excluded from 45Z credits due to high lifecycle assessments—with CORSIA citing 76.5 to 99.1 g CO2e/MJ—its role as the cheapest global backfill for oils like soy oil can drive overall palm oil consumption. The document notes that Congress already banned palm fatty acid distillates (PFADs) for sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) to address these substitution impacts and urges the Treasury to apply similar rigor to all vegetable oil-based fuel carbon intensity calculations.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) advises the US Treasury to distinguish between different Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) practices when calculating carbon intensity (CI) scores under section 45Z. CATF argues that no-till farming and planting cover crops should not be credited because their effects on soil organic carbon (SOC) are difficult to measure empirically, take years to occur, and are reversible. In contrast, the use of enhanced efficiency nitrogen fertilizer may remain creditable as its emissions reductions occur within a single growing season and are more easily quantified. Additionally, CATF asserts that section 45Z does not permit SOC offsets because the required methodology, such as CORSIA, does not credit SOC improvements due to permanence concerns. The document suggests that harvesting cover crops for permanent underground sequestration should be treated as a separate, potentially creditable practice if robust verification is in place.

The document argues that Section 45Z should prioritize low-carbon aviation fuels and avoid over-subsidizing biofuels with high indirect emissions. It recommends modifying the GREET model to align with CORSIA standards for indirect land use change (ILUC) and cautions against using negative emissions values or fugitive methane from oil and gas as feedstocks. Additionally, it advocates for the eligibility of synthetic sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and the independent application of tax credits across the fuel value chain.

The document introduces "climate-beneficial bioenergy," a concept developed by the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) to distinguish modern, climate-positive bioenergy from conventional systems that may cause deforestation or disrupt food supplies. To be climate-beneficial, systems must couple biomass with engineered processes to permanently store carbon, potentially achieving net carbon dioxide removal (CDR). The author argues these systems are essential for hard-to-decarbonize sectors and for counterbalancing residual emissions in sectors like agriculture. Key attributes include using waste streams, non-food crops on marginal land, or forest thinnings, and employing technologies such as gasification or pyrolysis with carbon capture and storage (CCS). The document emphasizes the need for lifecycle assessments and policy safeguards to prevent detrimental environmental and social impacts.

The document highlights how current life-cycle assessments (LCAs) for building materials in Canada may misdirect decarbonization efforts 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 their total lifecycle emissions, potentially overstating the carbon advantage of wood over materials like concrete and steel. The briefing recommends that the federal government invest in regionalized national life-cycle inventories and that policymakers prioritize energy efficiency, building durability, and material efficiency over a narrow focus on embodied emissions.

The report argues that achieving net-zero aviation emissions by 2050 requires a multi-fuel approach because sustainable biofuels alone cannot meet projected energy demands. It examines synthetic fuels (e-fuels) as a scalable drop-in solution, though currently expensive, and analyzes the potential of hydrogen and ammonia for regional and domestic flights. While electrification is limited to niche urban air mobility, the report suggests a 2050 fuel mix comprising 86% bio- and synthetic SAF and 14% zero-carbon fuels (hydrogen and ammonia) as a plausible path to decarbonization, provided there is massive scale-up of low-carbon hydrogen production and supportive policy frameworks.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) argues that the U.S. Department of the Treasury must implement strict guardrails for the Section 45V Clean Hydrogen Production Tax Credit to prevent increased greenhouse gas emissions. Key recommendations include requiring project-specific upstream emissions data for natural gas feedstocks, prohibiting negative emissions values from biomethane or fugitive methane, and awarding credits on a kilogram-by-kilogram basis rather than annual averages. CATF strongly supports the 'three pillars' of electricity-based production—incrementality, hourly matching, and deliverability—to avoid systemwide grid emissions, while opposing a blanket 5% incrementality exemption, which Rhodium Group analysis suggests could increase cumulative emissions by 1.5 billion metric tons through 2035.

The analysis finds that while gas-fired power plants emit 58% less CO2 at the stack than coal, the lifecycle benefit is reduced to 24% when considering upstream emissions. This benefit varies wildly by production basin; gas from northeast Pennsylvania can significantly reduce GHG impacts, while gas from the Permian basin could potentially worsen them by 20% compared to coal. The report concludes that for natural gas to be compatible with net-zero goals, both aggressive upstream methane abatement and downstream carbon capture and storage (CCS) are required, noting that abated coal with CCS actually shows 37% lower emissions than abated gas with CCS due to the latter's persistent upstream methane and liquefaction emissions.

The Electrical Utilities Criteria provide a framework for certifying entities and debt instruments based on their emission intensity and transition pathways. It defines specific thresholds for existing and new capacity across various technologies, including fossil fuels and renewables, while integrating cross-cutting requirements for carbon capture, hydrogen, and bioenergy. The criteria also mandate adaptation and resilience risk assessments to ensure long-term operational viability under climate change.

The report establishes a framework for certifying electrical utilities and their debt instruments based on their alignment with a 1.5-degree warming scenario. It defines a global emission intensity transition pathway based on IEA Net Zero (NZE) 2023 data, requiring utilities to reduce carbon intensity from 460 gCO2/kWh in 2025 to 0 by 2050. The criteria distinguish between existing capacity, which may be retrofitted with carbon capture or low-carbon co-firing, and new capacity, for which no new fossil fuel investments are eligible. It also sets specific non-combustion emission thresholds for hydropower, geothermal, and bioenergy, and incorporates EU Taxonomy standards for CO2 transport and methane leakages.

The report examines how governments can monitor green public procurement (GPP) to track progress toward climate goals. It categorizes monitoring into institutionalization, outputs, and outcomes, while detailing specific tools for measuring CO2 impacts. Through case studies of South Korea, Japan, Slovenia, Denmark, Malaysia, and the Netherlands, it identifies key success factors such as strong legal mandates and e-procurement integration. It also highlights significant barriers, including data insufficiency, decentralized procurement structures, and a lack of specialized technical skills. The document concludes with recommendations for governments to define clear targets, mandate monitoring through policy, and strengthen data management systems.

A coalition of NGOs and research institutions advises the U.S. Department of Energy to implement a comprehensive transparency model for the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs Program. The recommendations focus on four key areas: enabling community engagement through the release of project sites and benefit plans; building program credibility by sharing selection hypotheses and funding details; evaluating long-term impacts via public reporting of climate and environmental data; and fostering market development by sharing technical specifications and lessons learned from both successful and failed projects.

The report analyzes the landscape of voluntary standards and initiatives for carbon management (VSICMs), categorizing them into four types: GHG inventories, carbon offsets, disclosure platforms, and carbon-neutrality certifications. It details the corporate carbon management cycle—from leadership decisions and inventorying to mitigation and offsetting—and identifies key drivers for adoption, including regulations, investment strategies, and consumer pressure. The document benchmarks 35 leading VSICMs and highlights challenges such as a lack of harmonization and the risk of greenwashing.

The Electrical Utilities Criteria provide a framework for certifying entities and debt instruments based on their emissions intensity and transition pathways toward net-zero by 2040. The criteria distinguish between existing and new capacity, setting specific GHG thresholds for low-carbon technologies and phase-out dates for unabated fossil fuel plants. It also defines requirements for mitigation measures like CCS/CCUS and cofiring, as well as a comprehensive adaptation and resilience checklist to ensure infrastructure is robust against physical climate hazards.

The report outlines the development of certification criteria for electrical utilities to ensure their financing aligns with the Paris Agreement. It establishes a global emissions intensity transition pathway based on the IEA Net Zero Emissions (NZE) by 2050 scenario, targeting near-zero emissions for the power sector by 2040. The criteria distinguish between existing capacity, which must follow phase-out or retrofitting benchmarks, and new capacity, which must be low-carbon as no new fossil fuel plants are eligible. It also details specific thresholds for non-combustion emissions in hydropower, geothermal, and bioenergy, and sets requirements for decarbonization measures like Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and hydrogen co-firing.