Search Climate Insights Directory

Private equity firms have significantly enabled the U.S. to become the world's largest LNG exporter, with investment in 86% of operating terminals. The report argues that these investments drive climate change via methane emissions and pose safety risks to frontline communities, citing the 2022 Freeport LNG explosion as an example of operational failure linked to worker fatigue and mismanagement.

The document contends that the current energy crisis is a "natural gas market crisis" caused by fossil fuel price volatility, specifically citing the Russian invasion of Ukraine and post-pandemic recovery. It argues that natural gas is incompatible with the 1.5°C and 2°C Paris Agreement targets, noting that global gas emissions rose 23% between 2010 and 2019. The briefing highlights that solar and onshore wind are now cheaper than gas for two-thirds of the global population and that new gas projects face significant stranded asset risks, such as a USD 13 billion risk in the UK by 2050. It dismisses Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as an effective solution, noting that only 27 of over 260 projects undertaken between 1995 and 2018 were completed. Finally, it argues that for Africa, renewables are the fastest and cheapest way to expand energy access, as gas costs are projected to be double those of solar and wind by 2030.

The report warns that massive LNG expansion and a lack of ambitious national climate targets are jeopardizing the 1.5°C warming limit. It highlights that current 2030 targets lead to 2.4°C of warming and that LNG capacity under construction could increase emissions by over 1.9 GtCO2e per year by 2030 above Net Zero scenarios. While some policy progress is noted in the US, China, and the EU, international climate finance remains insufficient, and the phase-down of coal is largely being ignored by major emitters.

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas with over 80 times the warming power of CO2 over 20 years, though it breaks down in about 12 years. Approximately 60% of methane emissions result from human activity, primarily agriculture (40%), the energy sector (35%), and waste management (20%). The five largest global emitters are China, the U.S., Russia, India, and Brazil. In the U.S., the energy sector's contribution is estimated by the IEA at 54%, significantly higher than the EPA's 38% due to underreported 'ultra-emitting events'. Reduction strategies include repairing leaks in oil and gas production, capturing biogas from waste and agriculture, and using alternative livestock feed. Measurement is shifting from 'bottom-up' inventories to 'top-down' remote sensing via satellites and aircraft to better identify point sources. The Global Methane Pledge, launched at COP26, aims for a 30% reduction in global methane emissions from 2020 levels by 2030, though several top emitters have not yet joined.

The document assesses the status of the Global Methane Pledge one year after COP26, noting that while over 120 countries have committed to a 30% reduction in methane emissions by 2030, atmospheric methane levels remain at an all-time high. It details national actions in the US, EU, Canada, Egypt, Nigeria, Mexico, Colombia, and Ecuador, while calling for $100 billion in annual financing to address the funding gap for methane mitigation across the fossil fuel, agriculture, and waste sectors.

The document argues that coal mine methane (CMM) is a critical but underreported driver of emissions in New South Wales, accounting for over 90% of the state's energy sector methane emissions. Ember proposes two new pillars for the NSW EPA's Action Plan: 'Inform and Plan' and 'Mitigate'. The 'Inform and Plan' pillar suggests collaborating with international initiatives like the International Methane Emissions Observatory and implementing high-tier IPCC measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) methodologies to address reporting gaps. The 'Mitigate' pillar recommends a 75% reduction target for methane emissions by 2030, the closure of 'gassy' thermal coal mines, and a commitment to no new coal mines or expansions. The report highlights that current reporting may be significantly underestimated, citing IEA estimates that Australia's reported CMM emissions could be missing 800 thousand tonnes.

The document analyzes the synergistic effect of the Energy Act of 2020, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, and the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 on the U.S. energy transition.

The report finds that 15 major meat and dairy companies produce combined methane emissions of 12.8 million tonnes, representing 11.1% of global livestock-related methane. These emissions exceed the total methane footprints of countries like Russia, Canada, and Australia. The authors highlight a severe lack of corporate transparency, noting that 60% of the analyzed companies fail to report total supply chain (scope 3) emissions. The report criticizes governments for relying on 'techno fixes' like anaerobic digesters rather than reducing livestock numbers, and calls for binding targets and a just transition toward agroecology.

The report estimates that five major meat and ten major dairy companies emit approximately 12.8 million tonnes of methane, representing 11.1% of global anthropogenic methane emissions from livestock. These companies' total greenhouse gas emissions (734 million tonnes CO2 equivalent) exceed those of Germany. The authors highlight a significant lack of transparency, noting that 60% of these companies do not report full supply chain (Scope 3) emissions, and none report supply-chain methane. The document calls for mandatory emissions disclosure and a reduction in livestock numbers to meet the 1.5°C global warming limit.

The report finds that 15 major meat and dairy companies emit approximately 12.8 million tonnes of methane, representing 3.4% of global anthropogenic methane emissions and 11.1% of livestock-related methane. These combined emissions exceed the methane footprints of several countries, including Russia, Canada, Australia, and Germany. The authors highlight a pervasive lack of corporate transparency, noting that 60% of the companies fail to report total GHGs or scope 3 emissions, and none report supply chain methane. The report calls for mandatory reporting, binding reduction targets, and a systemic shift away from industrial animal agriculture.

The report estimates that five of the largest meat companies and ten of the largest dairy corporations emit approximately 12.8 million tonnes of methane, representing 3.4% of global anthropogenic methane emissions and 11.1% of global livestock methane. Total greenhouse gas emissions for these companies reach 734 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent, exceeding Germany's national emissions. The authors highlight a lack of corporate transparency, noting that 60% of the analyzed companies do not report total emissions or Scope 3 emissions, and none reported supply chain methane. The report calls for binding reduction targets, mandatory reporting, and a systemic shift toward agroecology to meet the 1.5°C global warming limit.

The report finds that 15 major meat and dairy companies emit approximately 12.8 million tonnes of methane, representing 3.4% of global anthropogenic methane emissions and 11.1% of global livestock methane. The combined greenhouse gas emissions of these companies (734 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent) exceed those of Germany. The document highlights a significant lack of corporate transparency, with 60% of the analyzed companies failing to report total emissions or scope 3 emissions. It calls for binding emission targets, mandatory reporting, and a systemic shift toward agroecology to meet the 1.5°C warming limit.

The report finds that 15 major meat and dairy companies collectively emit approximately 12.8 million tonnes of methane, representing 3.4% of all anthropogenic global methane emissions and 11.1% of global livestock-related methane. The authors highlight a significant lack of corporate transparency, noting that 60% of these companies do not report total emissions across their value chain (Scope 3). The document calls for binding government targets for agricultural emissions and a systemic shift toward agroecological systems to meet the 1.5°C warming limit.

The document argues that current efforts, including the Global Methane Pledge, are insufficient to meet the 40–45% reduction in methane emissions required by 2030. It proposes a global agreement based on three pillars: an updated monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) framework; national methane action plans for the energy, agriculture, and waste sectors; and technical and financial assistance for developing countries.

Global Energy Monitor (GEM) finds that 30 fossil fuel companies are responsible for 43% of the industry's global methane emissions. The analysis identifies the National Iranian Oil Company as the largest emitter and highlights the dominance of Chinese state-owned enterprises in coal mine methane emissions. The report emphasizes that emissions vary based on infrastructure age, operator type, and geographic location, noting that some oil and gas emissions could be reduced at no net cost.

The report examines the impact of global decarbonisation on Africa's natural gas sector, distinguishing between existing and emerging producers. It argues that faster global transitions to net-zero emissions will reduce LNG demand and prices, creating 'external' climate transition risks that threaten the viability of future projects. The analysis suggests that domestic demand is an insufficient hedge against these risks due to regulated low prices and the increasing competitiveness of renewable energy. Emerging producers are identified as particularly vulnerable due to weaker sovereign credit ratings and the timing of their infrastructure investments.

The document examines the role of Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) in facilitating the shift from fossil fuels to clean energy in five emerging economies. It argues against the use of natural gas as a 'bridging fuel,' citing price volatility, the risk of stranded assets, and methane emissions. Instead, it advocates for 'leapfrogging' directly to renewables, noting that solar and wind are cost-competitive and better suited for expanding energy access in rural areas. The brief emphasizes that a gas-led transition would be economically disadvantageous and inconsistent with the 1.5°C Paris Agreement goal.

The document argues that the Paris financial center continues to support oil and gas expansion despite commitments to the 1.5°C goal. It systematically dismantles ten 'received ideas' used by banks, insurers, and asset managers to justify this support, citing IEA and IPCC data to show that no new fossil fuel projects are compatible with net-zero pathways. The briefing highlights that 'transition' claims by oil majors are often unsupported by investment data and that engagement without the threat of exclusion is ineffective.

The CER's submission on the draft NWRS-3 argues that the strategy must move beyond treating climate change as a future threat and instead implement binding regulations to protect water security. The CER advocates for the formal legal protection of Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSAs), strengthened compliance monitoring and enforcement (CME) through the 'Blue Scorpions', and a moratorium on unconventional oil and gas exploration due to risks of water contamination and methane emissions. It further emphasizes the need for transparency in water licensing and the alignment of the NWRS-3 with South Africa's international commitments under the Paris Agreement and the domestic Climate Change Bill.

The document argues that the EU faces a 'policy vacuum' regarding methane emissions from livestock farming, which accounts for 53% of the EU's anthropogenic methane. While the Global Methane Pledge targets a 30% reduction by 2030, business-as-usual projections suggest livestock methane will only drop by 3.7%. The report identifies failures in the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) and the Effort Sharing Regulation, and highlights the undue influence of the agri-food lobby on the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED). It concludes that shifting to healthier diets offers the highest potential for reductions and calls for a specific 2030 methane reduction target.