Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines how the Russia-Ukraine war has destabilized energy markets, undermining Russia's role as an 'energy superpower' and creating significant economic pressure on the Global South. It presents three scenarios: 'Stable high' prices, 'Persistent volatility', and 'Business as usual', analyzing how each affects national budgets, regional stability in the Middle East and Africa, and the global transition to renewable energy. The authors argue that while the crisis may incentivize some decarbonization, it also risks locking in fossil fuel production in the Global South and prioritizing immediate energy security over Paris Agreement goals.

The report analyzes the international public finance (IPF) trends of high-income signatories of the Glasgow Statement, evaluating their fossil fuel exclusion policies and clean energy strategies. It finds that while some robust practices exist, many signatories lack transparent policies, particularly regarding gas exclusions and concrete clean energy targets. The document highlights the potential to shift USD 28 billion annually from fossil fuels to clean energy and uses case studies from Ethiopia and Sri Lanka to demonstrate how this shift can prevent fossil fuel lock-in and support just transitions in low- and middle-income countries.

The report argues that governments are reacting to the energy crisis by prioritizing short-term fossil fuel security over long-term decarbonization, risking a 'gold rush' for new gas infrastructure and domestic production. While some progress in renewables and green hydrogen is noted, the authors highlight a prevalence of 'bad practices' such as fossil fuel subsidies, tax cuts for petrol, and the expansion of LNG facilities. The document provides a framework of 'do's and don'ts', urging governments to instead focus on energy efficiency, electrification, behavioral changes, and the reinvestment of fossil fuel windfall profits into clean energy to avoid stranded assets and irreversible warming.

Reclaim Finance criticizes Société Générale for continuing to finance fossil fuel expansion despite its 2050 net-zero commitment. The organization highlights loopholes in the bank's policies that allow continued support for conventional oil and gas, shale oil and gas, liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure, and coal mining through diversified companies.

The report contends that natural gas expansion in Africa contradicts the Paris Agreement and poses significant economic and environmental risks. It argues that renewable energy is more cost-effective and creates more sustainable employment than the fossil fuel industry. Through case studies of Egypt, Nigeria, and Senegal, the document demonstrates that shifting from gas-based power to high-renewable scenarios would increase job creation and, in the case of Egypt, significantly reduce premature deaths from air pollution. It concludes that developed nations must stop financing fossil fuels and increase climate finance to support Africa's transition to zero-emissions energy systems.

The briefing concludes that ENI is not on track for the 1.5°C climate goal, as its cumulative greenhouse gas emissions are projected to exceed its allocated carbon budget by at least 13.6% by 2050. The analysis finds that ENI's short-to-medium term plans are incompatible with 1.5°C because the company continues to invest in oil and gas expansion, with production expected to grow until 2025. Furthermore, the report argues that ENI relies unsustainably on carbon offsets and Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS) to meet its targets, while its capital expenditure remains heavily focused on fossil fuels despite claims of diversification.

The document argues that TotalEnergies is not on track for the 1.5°C climate goal, as its cumulative greenhouse gas emissions are projected to exceed the compatible carbon budget by at least 31.8% by 2050. It finds that the company's strategy remains driven by oil and gas expansion, with production levels expected to increase by 18.4% by 2030 compared to 2020. The analysis highlights an unsustainable reliance on carbon offsets and a CAPEX allocation that continues to favor fossil fuels over renewables.

Reclaim Finance criticizes RWE for maintaining a coal phase-out target of 2038, which it claims is eight years behind scientific recommendations. The organization highlights RWE's role as one of Europe's largest CO2 emitters, its reliance on fossil gas as a bridge fuel, and its efforts to obtain €2.6 billion in compensation from the German government. It specifically calls on major shareholders, including Crédit Agricole/Amundi, Société Générale, and BNP Paribas, to use the upcoming AGM to sanction the company's lack of a coherent transition strategy.

The statement criticizes the World Bank and IFC for supporting an unsustainable gas-based energy model in Bangladesh and calls for an immediate shift toward renewable energy to avoid stranded assets and align with the Paris Agreement.

The document criticizes the World Bank and IFC for fostering Pakistan's dependence on expensive fossil gas and imported LNG, urging a shift toward indigenous renewable energy sources and transparent consultation with civil society.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has forced European states to prioritize energy security over climate goals, leading to a 'dash for LNG' that outbids developing nations and encourages a global return to coal. This shift undermines EU climate leadership and risks 'locking in' long-term fossil fuel infrastructure in Africa and Asia.

Reclaim Finance argues that ENGIE's climate strategy is insufficient, citing a lack of short-term targets, a reliance on fossil gas, and a coal exit strategy based on asset sales rather than closures. The briefing recommends that investors vote against the 'Say on Climate' resolution and challenge the company on its gas and coal strategies.

The document examines the World Bank Group's (WBG) role in expanding fossil gas infrastructure in Indonesia, asserting that this strategy locks the country into long-term greenhouse gas emissions and dependency on fossil fuels. It highlights contradictions between WBG strategies, such as the Country Partnership Framework 2021-24 and the Indonesia Economic Prospects Report, and global climate goals like the IEA's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 roadmap. The report specifically cites the WBG's support for the BP Tangguh project and warns against 'false solutions' like Carbon Capture Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) and coal gasification.

The document details discussions within the TRAN committee on two key legislative files: the AFIR and RED II. For AFIR, members debated the inadequacy of previous charging station targets, the need for higher power outputs, and the role of LNG in heavy-duty transport. Regarding RED II, the committee discussed increasing the renewable energy share to 40% by 2030, the controversial inclusion of low-carbon fuels, and the prioritization of electrification for road transport versus synthetic fuels for aviation and maritime sectors.

The report finds that the world's 60 largest banks provided USD $4.6 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2016 to 2021, with $742 billion in 2021 alone. It highlights a significant gap between banks' net-zero commitments and their actual lending and underwriting practices, particularly regarding companies expanding oil, gas, and coal production. The analysis identifies JPMorgan Chase as the world's worst banker of fossil fuels over this period. The report also details financing in high-impact subsectors, such as tar sands, Arctic oil and gas, and coal power, while emphasizing the human rights impacts on Indigenous and frontline communities.

Reclaim Finance assesses TotalEnergies' 2022 climate plan as insufficient, noting that the company's emissions are projected to decrease by only 5.8% to 6.7% between 2015 and 2030. The analysis highlights a 'fossil-first' investment strategy where over 70% of CAPEX remains dedicated to oil and gas, and criticizes the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) as fundamentally incompatible with climate goals. The document urges shareholders to vote against the management-sponsored climate resolution at the 2022 AGM.

Fortum/Uniper is criticized for having an inadequate coal exit strategy and increasing its dependence on gas, while continuing to receive significant financial support from major banks and investors, including French institutions like BNP Paribas and Société Générale.

Recourse urges development finance institutions (DFIs) to suspend Russia and Belarus as members, divest from their companies, and cease operations in both countries. The organization argues that the war is fueled by a global addiction to fossil fuels and calls for a ban on Russian fossil fuel imports and an end to financial support for fossil fuel infrastructure in Russia to avoid replacing Russian fuels with other fossil fuels like liquefied natural gas.

The report examines 21 proposed US LNG export terminals, finding that none reached a final investment decision (FID) in 2021 due to a lack of offtake contracts and project financing. It highlights that only three projects secured direct project finance totaling US$1.6 billion against an estimated total cost of US$244 billion. The document argues that these projects face stiff competition from lower-cost producers like Qatar, regulatory hurdles regarding environmental justice, and a global shift toward renewables. Furthermore, it notes that the combined lifecycle emissions of 19 proposed terminals would be 1 gigatonne of CO2 equivalent per year, contradicting the IEA's Net Zero by 2050 Scenario.

The report finds that British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador provided at least CAD 2.5 billion in fossil fuel subsidies in FY 2020/21 and CAD 1.5 billion in FY 2021/22. It argues that these subsidies incentivize production that might not otherwise occur and hinder Canada's ability to meet its 1.5°C climate target.