Search Climate Insights Directory

The India-UK Energy for Growth Partnership has focused on creating tools for energy scenario planning, reforming gas and power markets to reduce import dependence, and identifying climate finance mechanisms for Indian cities. Key initiatives include the 'India Energy Security Scenarios 2047' tool and the adoption of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to align energy planning with social and green growth objectives.

The report argues that the proposed 1.2 GW Karpowership gas power plants are not aligned with a least-cost investment pathway for South Africa. Drawing on a study by Meridian Economics and the CSIR, it finds that the grid should prioritize rapid renewable energy build-out and storage, with new gas capacity not being economically optimal until the mid-2030s. The document concludes that commissioning these plants by 2022 would create an unnecessary economic burden for ratepayers and that the procurement process (RMIPP) was biased against renewable energy options.

The document serves as a PAIA manual for the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (DMRE), detailing how individuals can exercise their constitutional right to access information. It outlines the department's mandate to develop the mineral resources and energy sector, lists the legislation it administers, and categorizes the types of records it holds, including policies on electricity, coal, gas, and nuclear energy. The manual specifies the process for submitting requests via Form A, the associated fees (such as a R100 request fee), and the internal appeal process to the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy. Additionally, it describes the department's handling of personal information under the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA), including the categories of data subjects and the security measures implemented to protect such data.

The Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy of South Africa provides written reasons for a Ministerial Determination regarding the procurement of new generation capacity. The determination aims to ensure energy security and address load shedding by procuring capacity from renewables, storage, gas, and coal, aligned with the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP 2019).

The toolkit critiques the draft IRP 2023, arguing that it deviates from 'least cost' energy pathways by favoring fossil fuels over renewables and failing to adequately address air quality, health impacts, and climate commitments. It provides a framework for the public to challenge the DMRE's modelling assumptions, the premature timing of the plan relative to the Integrated Energy Plan and Sectoral Emission Targets, and the lack of transparency in public participation.

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 seven ways the TTIP trade negotiations could negatively impact chemical regulation, including the risk of 'downward' harmonization of standards, the erosion of US state-level regulatory authority, and the potential to increase fracking for natural gas. It highlights the disparity between the weak US federal chemical management system and the stronger EU policies, warning that TTIP could slow global progress on toxic chemicals and limit access to hazard information.

The report analyzes 118 planned petrochemical projects in the US, finding that they could add 153.8 MMT of annual CO2e emissions, equivalent to nearly 40 coal plants. It highlights that a small number of megaprojects drive the majority of these emissions, with ammonia production being a primary contributor. The document argues that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an ineffective solution used to justify fossil-fuel-based expansion, often supported by federal subsidies. It also notes that the buildout is concentrated in disadvantaged communities in the Gulf Coast and Appalachia, worsening environmental racism.

The report 'Toxic Accounts' by Clean Creatives examines how BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Shell shifted their marketing strategies from 2020 to 2024. The analysis finds that these companies moved away from net-zero ambitions and 'greenwashing' toward a strategy of 'fossil fuel dominance,' emphasizing energy security and the indispensability of oil and gas. The document details the use of 'false solutions'—such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), blue/gray hydrogen, and certain biofuels—to justify continued fossil fuel production. It highlights specific campaign evolutions, such as BP's shift from 'greening companies' to 'energy security' and ExxonMobil's 'Breaking Free' anti-EV campaign, arguing that these narratives delay the clean energy transition to prioritize short-term shareholder returns.

The document asserts that methane emissions from the natural gas supply chain are significantly underestimated, potentially making gas power more harmful to the climate than coal if leakage rates exceed 3%. For Japan, which imports over 90% of its gas as LNG, this creates both climate risks and energy security vulnerabilities. The briefing advocates for a transition away from gas through policies such as phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, prioritizing grid infrastructure for electrification and renewables, simplifying permitting for renewables, and implementing Carbon Contracts for Difference (CfD).

The report asserts that fossil gas cannot be a transition fuel due to methane leakage and the urgent need to cut global carbon emissions by 50% by 2030. It criticizes gas blending as an inefficient strategy and advocates for the scaling of low-carbon hydrogen, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors like steel production, while warning that electrolysers must be paired with new renewable energy generation to avoid hindering grid decarbonisation.

A coalition of 226 scientists, financial professionals, and civil society organizations argues that including fossil gas in the EU Taxonomy contradicts climate science and risks turning the framework into a greenwashing tool. The authors highlight the high climate impact of methane leaks and assert that such a move would undermine the EU's global climate leadership and the goals of the Green Deal.

The Energy Charter Treaty (ECT) is criticized for allowing fossil fuel investors to use Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to challenge climate policies, such as the Netherlands' phase-out of fossil fuels by 2030. While the EU has attempted to modernize the ECT, the requirement for unanimity among 56 contracting states has stalled progress. The document argues that withdrawal is a viable alternative, provided that the 20-year 'survival clause'—which continues to protect existing investments after withdrawal—is neutralized. Using the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), the authors argue that a group of states can legally modify the treaty 'inter se' to extinguish this clause because the ECT consists of reciprocal bilateral relations rather than obligations binding on all parties. Such a coordinated withdrawal would immediately end treaty-based fossil fuel protection and ISDS for the withdrawing states, reducing legal risks and aligning with EU climate objectives.

The open letter argues that fossil gas is incompatible with the EU's climate-neutrality goals and the 1.5°C temperature limit. It claims that investing in renewable energy creates up to three times more jobs per euro than fossil fuel investments and that fossil gas infrastructure is generally incompatible with renewable gases at scale.

ClientEarth calls on the European Parliament to veto the Taxonomy Complementary Delegated Act on Climate, arguing that the European Commission failed to conduct a dedicated Impact Assessment or ensure consistency with the European Climate Law. The organization asserts that fossil gas activities do not lack feasible low-carbon alternatives and that the act risks creating legal uncertainty and locking in carbon-intensive assets, thereby conflicting with the Paris Agreement and the EU's 2050 climate-neutrality goal.

The document details how fossil fuels cause systemic health damage, affecting organs such as the heart, lungs, and brain, with specific vulnerabilities identified for children, the elderly, and pregnant women. It further maps these health risks to the entire fossil fuel lifecycle, from extraction and refining to combustion and waste.

The document argues that integrating public health and equity into climate policy can broaden political support and save lives, estimating that low-carbon policies could avoid 1 million American deaths annually. It proposes a roadmap of legislative and agency actions, including banning natural gas expansion, transitioning to regenerative agriculture, and electrifying public transit, to align the U.S. with the Paris Agreement's 1.5C target. The brief emphasizes that health co-benefits could offset 10% to 41% of U.S. mitigation costs.

British Columbia is positioning itself for the low-carbon transition by leveraging a low-emissions electricity grid and a growing clean technology sector, though it faces risks from its reliance on metallurgical coal and natural gas exports. While the province has 175 transition-opportunity companies, primarily concentrated in Metro Vancouver, challenges remain regarding the domestic adoption of these technologies and the alignment of provincial policy to support small and medium-sized domestic firms. Vulnerable workers are concentrated in rural communities and among Indigenous populations, necessitating a shift in support toward new growth areas to ensure economic resilience.

The study evaluates three energy scenarios (A, B, and C) to determine the fuel mixes required to limit atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Scenario A assumes unlimited CO2 increase, while Scenario B limits the increase to 75% and Scenario C limits it to 440 ppm. The analysis highlights that achieving these limits would require a massive shift toward non-fossil fuels, such as nuclear, solar, and biomass, as coal and shale oil are identified as high-emission sources. The document warns that CO2 concentrations reaching 500 ppm would likely cause undesirable climatic changes, whereas 440 ppm is considered a relatively safe level.

The report argues that the EU's energy security, particularly regarding natural gas, cannot be solved by a 'magic bullet' but requires a combined approach of supply-side and demand-side measures. While LNG and internal market infrastructure reduce vulnerability to supply disruptions, demand-side actions like energy efficiency and renewables are essential to reduce the overall cost of imports and long-term dependency. The analysis highlights that Central and Eastern European Member States remain particularly vulnerable to Russian supply cuts, but that decarbonization goals in the power sector do not necessarily conflict with gas security due to the sector's fuel-switching capabilities. The report concludes that the EU should set ambitious, quantifiable energy efficiency and renewable targets to reinforce its strategic resilience.