Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the complex intersection of political instability, economic crisis, and energy transition in Nigeria. It highlights the tension between Nigeria's desire to leverage fossil fuels for economic diversification and the global shift by financing partners toward renewables. The author analyzes the inefficiencies of the power sector, using the Kaduna Electricity Distribution Company as a case study, and proposes three policy options for the Tinubu administration to integrate energy transition into national development. It concludes that securing international capital requires aligning domestic policies with the strict de-fossilization requirements of partners like the EU and USA, while exploring innovative support for subnational entities and traditional rulers.

The document argues that CCS costs remain persistently high due to design complexity and a high need for customization, which prevents the technology from achieving the experience rates and economies of scale seen in renewable energy. In Canada, actual project costs often exceed modelled estimates, and the technology's viability in the oil and gas sector relies heavily on ongoing government subsidies. While CCS may be useful for hard-to-decarbonize industries like cement, the brief suggests it is an inefficient use of public funds for the oil and gas sector compared to alternatives like methane reduction and electrification.

The briefing proposes that the European Union leverage its position as a major oil and gas importer to drive global methane reductions by implementing a methane import standard. It suggests a combination of a 'prescriptive standard,' which mandates specific technologies and practices like Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR), and an 'intensity standard,' which sets a maximum limit on emissions per unit of gas produced. The document asserts that there are no 'insuperable legal obstacles' to these standards and suggests that fees from non-compliance could fund methane mitigation in lower-income countries. It highlights that such a move would align with the European Parliament's position and complement voluntary initiatives like CLEAN.

The report identifies a 'planning gap' in Europe's trajectory toward 2050 climate neutrality and proposes that the updated National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) be transformed into comprehensive roadmaps. It recommends that Member States move beyond a narrow focus on renewables to include a diverse portfolio of clean firm energy (advanced nuclear, superhot rock geothermal), carbon capture and storage (CCS), and zero-carbon fuels. The authors emphasize the need for robust energy system modelling, cross-border infrastructure coordination, and the implementation of financial mechanisms like Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfD) to attract investment. Additionally, the report calls for a focused strategy to reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas supply chain and the creation of a net-zero implementation tracker to ensure accountability.

The report finds that oil- and gas-fired power plants in development increased by 13% in the last year to 783 GW, with Asia accounting for nearly two-thirds of this capacity. If built, these projects would cost an estimated US$611 billion and generate 41,239 million tonnes of CO2e lifetime emissions. The analysis highlights that China leads global development, while the United States possesses the largest existing capacity. The report further challenges the reliability of fossil fuels during extreme weather and notes that renewables with storage are now cheaper than gas-fired power in many regions, including China.

The document analyzes the persistent high costs of carbon capture and storage (CCS), particularly within the Canadian oil and gas sector. It argues that high design complexity and the need for customization prevent the cost reductions seen in renewable technologies like solar and wind. While CCS may be vital for hard-to-abate sectors like cement, the brief concludes that public investment in CCS for oil and gas is risky and inefficient.

The We Mean Business Coalition's 'Fossil to Clean' campaign provides a framework for phasing out fossil fuels by 2040. It outlines specific requirements for demand-side companies to end unabated fossil fuel use, for producers to cease new exploration and reach near-zero methane emissions by 2030, for financial institutions to halt new fossil fuel funding, and for governments to decarbonize power systems by 2035-2040.

The document is a joint letter from a coalition of NGOs calling for the adoption of amendment NC12 to the UK Energy Bill. The amendment seeks to ban the venting and flaring of methane by 2025 and implement stricter measures to prevent unintended emissions. The authors argue that current waste in the North Sea oil and gas sector is sufficient to supply at least 760,000 average UK homes and that delaying the ban until 2030 would jeopardize the UK's energy security and global climate leadership. They highlight that methane is over 80 times more dangerous than carbon dioxide and contributes 0.5°C to current global warming. The letter warns that insufficient climate action could cost the UK economy 1% of GDP, or at least £22 billion per year, by 2045.

Reclaim Finance analyzed 150 financial institutions and found that very few have adopted steel decarbonization targets, and those that have are characterized by significant flaws. Only 16 of 60 assessed banks have steel targets, most of which rely on intensity metrics rather than absolute emissions and exclude underwriting activities and Scope 3 emissions. The report argues that current targets are insufficient to prevent investment in high-carbon infrastructure, such as new blast furnaces and metallurgical coal mines.

The document is a joint letter from thirteen environmental and energy organisations urging President von der Leyen to prioritise the reduction of global methane emissions in her final State of the Union address. The authors argue that methane is a critical but overlooked climate threat, being over 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period and responsible for nearly half of the current net global temperature increase. They specifically call for the adoption of an ambitious EU Methane Regulation by the end of the legislative term to address emissions from the oil, gas, and coal sectors, as well as accelerated progress toward the Global Methane Pledge.

The report identifies livestock fermentation, rice cultivation, and land-use changes as primary drivers of agri-food methane emissions. It argues that transitioning to plant-rich diets, improving livestock management, and adopting sustainable rice farming can reduce greenhouse gases while improving public health by reducing air pollution and non-communicable diseases.

The report identifies livestock production, rice cultivation, and land use as primary methane sources in agriculture, highlighting that the sector accounts for approximately 42 percent of anthropogenic methane emissions. It argues that mitigating these emissions provides significant health co-benefits, such as reducing tropospheric ozone and respiratory illnesses caused by biomass burning and manure management. Proposed solutions include transitioning to plant-rich diets, implementing alternate wetting and drying (AWD) in rice farming, and adopting regenerative agricultural practices. The document emphasizes the need for systemic policy changes, including the reform of agricultural subsidies and the implementation of mandatory emissions regulations, while noting that livestock remains a critical nutritional and economic resource in the Global South.

The report outlines how methane contributes to global warming and ground-level ozone, leading to significant respiratory and cardiovascular health risks. It identifies agriculture, energy, and waste as the primary anthropogenic sources of methane and advocates for both transformational system changes and near-term technical solutions to reduce emissions and improve public health.

The report identifies that the waste sector, comprising municipal solid waste and wastewater, contributes one fifth of global anthropogenic methane emissions. It argues that improving waste management—through organic waste diversion, landfill gas capture, and upgraded sanitation—can significantly reduce tropospheric ozone and prevent millions of premature deaths. The document provides a framework for health professionals to advocate for these changes and highlights case studies from Nigeria, Indonesia, India, and the Philippines to demonstrate the feasibility of methane mitigation and its associated health and economic benefits.

The report details how the oil, gas, and coal industries contribute significantly to anthropogenic methane emissions and the associated health risks from co-emitted pollutants. It advocates for a transition to clean energy and the adoption of specific technical solutions to reduce methane leaks and flaring, highlighting the immediate health benefits of such actions.

The report details how the energy sector contributes significantly to global anthropogenic methane emissions, specifically through oil and gas extraction (23%) and coal mining (12%). It highlights the severe health risks associated with methane and its co-pollutants, such as tropospheric ozone, NOx, and PM2.5, which contribute to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The document advocates for a full phase-out of fossil fuels while recommending immediate technical solutions—such as leak detection, vapor recovery units, and the banning of fracking—to reduce near-term warming and protect public health, particularly in vulnerable communities in Iraq, Nigeria, South Africa, and Canada.

The report identifies 19 private equity firms investing in 35 oil and gas companies that have received federal drilling permits since 2017. It estimates that U.S. taxpayers could face up to $384 million in cleanup costs for nearly 2,700 wells operated by these private-equity-backed companies across eight states, with Colorado and New Mexico facing the highest liabilities. The authors argue that the private equity business model—characterized by high leverage and quick exits—combined with outdated federal bonding requirements (averaging only $2,122 per well) and bankruptcy laws, allows firms to externalize environmental costs. The document also highlights 'greenwashing' strategies, such as the promotion of 'certified gas,' used to maintain investor support despite ongoing fossil fuel expansion.

The report argues that the coal sector is not aligned with 1.5°C targets and poses significant financial risks, including over US$1.4 trillion in potential stranded assets. It recommends that banks immediately cease financing new coal projects and implement a timed escalation strategy to exit coal exposure by 2030 in OECD and European countries, and by 2040 worldwide. Key requirements for coal companies include the adoption of public, asset-by-asset phase-out plans and just transition strategies for workers and the environment.

The document argues that British Columbia's proposed methane regulations lag behind international best practices, particularly regarding timelines for existing facilities and the lack of a policy for compressor engine exhaust. The coalition recommends accelerating the target for near-zero methane emissions to 2030, implementing stricter standards for pneumatic devices, tanks, and compressor seals by 2025, and adopting a monthly instrument-based leak detection and repair (LDAR) regime.

The document argues that because a significant portion of the EU's methane footprint originates from imported energy, the European Commission should leverage new energy contracts to mandate methane mitigation. It suggests that EU-based companies in joint ventures abroad should be encouraged to adopt best practices for reducing emissions from production operations outside EU borders.