Search Climate Insights Directory

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) documents global campaigns where local and Indigenous communities use collective rights to oppose corporate-led extractive and agricultural projects. The report highlights legal battles against dams in Malaysia and oil pollution in Nigeria, resistance to tar sands in North America, and the promotion of community-based forest governance and food sovereignty in regions such as Indonesia, Cameroon, and Latin America.

The document outlines various international efforts to protect the ancestral and collective rights of local communities and Indigenous Peoples. It highlights resistance against large-scale industrial projects, such as the Bakun dam in Malaysia, mining in the Philippines and Costa Rica, and oil sands extraction in Canada and the US. The report also discusses community-based forest governance in Indonesia and Cameroon, the promotion of food sovereignty through local markets in Colombia and seed banks in Uruguay, and the fight against genetically modified organisms (GMOs) globally. It argues that community rights serve as a legal and social tool to resist corporate dominance and transition toward environmentally sustainable and socially just societies.

The petition argues that large-scale tar sands development in Alberta, Canada, causes direct and indirect 'takings' of protected species, specifically 130 migratory bird species (including the endangered whooping crane) and threatened woodland caribou. It details how tailings ponds, habitat fragmentation, and pollution lead to mass mortality and population decline. The document further asserts that Canada's regulatory failures and the industry's contribution to global warming exacerbate these threats, violating the spirit of international conservation agreements. Consequently, the petitioners call for a formal investigation and certification by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior under the Pelly Amendment.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) advocates against the Keystone XL pipeline, citing the high greenhouse gas emissions of Alberta's tar sands and concerns over political influence in the State Department's permitting process. The statement also details CIEL's efforts to eliminate coal funding in international finance institutions, specifically criticizing World Bank loans for coal projects in South Africa and Kosovo, while referencing IPCC findings that renewables could meet nearly 80 percent of global energy supply by mid-century.

The document presents a satirical or corrective 'erratum' to Shell's 2010 annual report, detailing systemic failures in environmental protection and human rights. It lists specific cases of pollution in Nigeria, Curaçao, and Canada, labour abuses in Brazil, and the risks of high-volume fracking. The report proposes a set of 'Key Performance Indicators' for 2011, including a 5% annual decrease in absolute CO2 emissions and a commitment to invest 50% of annual profits into wind and solar power.

The report details 12 sustainability cases involving Royal Dutch Shell, highlighting systemic issues such as oil spills and gas flaring in Nigeria, toxic pesticide contamination in Brazil, and the high carbon intensity of Canadian tar sands. It examines the company's expansion into unconventional gas through fracking and its influence on political processes in the UK, Netherlands, and other host countries. The document argues that Shell's business strategy prioritizes profit over environmental and human rights, often employing a 'double standard' in its operational safety and reporting.

The Keystone XL pipeline, proposed by TransCanada to transport tar sands oil from Canada to Houston, faces significant opposition from U.S. lawmakers, grassroots organizers, and federal agencies. The EPA gave the State Department's draft Environmental Impact Statement a failing grade for omitting global warming impacts. Concerns include the potential contamination of the Ogallala Aquifer in Nebraska and the higher carbon emissions associated with tar sands oil compared to conventional oil. The document highlights controversies surrounding Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's perceived bias and her ties to TransCanada's lead lobbyist, Paul Elliott.

The report estimates that the federal and provincial governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador provide over $2.8 billion in annual subsidies to the upstream oil sector. Using a definition based on the WTO's Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the study identifies 63 subsidy programs, with development subsidies (reducing capital expenditures) comprising 59% of the total value. Alberta receives the largest share of support (73% of total subsidies), which exceeds its share of crude oil production (67%). Macroeconomic modelling suggests that these subsidies increase national oil production by approximately 5% and GHG emissions by 2% by 2020, while negatively impacting government balances in the federal government, Alberta, and Saskatchewan.

The report examines the environmental, social, and economic impacts of unconventional oil extraction, focusing on tar sands and oil shale. It highlights that these resources produce significantly higher greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil and cause severe local ecological damage, such as boreal forest destruction in Canada. The document criticizes the EU's Fuel Quality Directive for potentially underestimating the carbon intensity of these fuels and urges the EU to discourage their import and investment. It also details the involvement of European companies in projects across Venezuela, Madagascar, Congo, Russia, Jordan, and Morocco, warning that such developments in countries with weak governance risk exacerbating the 'resource curse' and undermining Millennium Development Goals.

The report outlines the results of expert dialogues held between 2009 and 2010 focused on North American energy and climate collaboration. It highlights a period of significant political uncertainty, particularly regarding U.S. federal legislation, and argues that Canada and Mexico must engage actively in policy discussions to avoid becoming "policy takers." Key areas for cooperation include carbon pricing, renewable energy investment, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and transportation fuel standards. The document emphasizes that while a unified "North American Bubble" for emissions targets is unlikely, pragmatic, sector-specific coordination and the harmonization of technical standards offer viable paths forward in the absence of a continental regulatory framework.

The document examines Canada's position as a major energy producer and the risks associated with its fragmented, province-led energy approach. It highlights the tension between Canada's traditional energy exports—particularly oil sands—and the global shift toward clean energy. The authors argue that a national strategy is essential to meet climate goals, protect trade interests (especially with the U.S.), and establish global leadership in technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS). It also assesses the current 'patchwork' of international energy governance, including the roles of the IEA, IRENA, and trade agreements like NAFTA.

The document analyzes the energy profiles, infrastructure, and security perspectives of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, highlighting their deep interdependence. It examines existing trilateral and bilateral cooperation frameworks, such as NAFTA and the U.S.-Canada Clean Energy Dialogue, and identifies potential trade irritants like border adjustments and low-carbon fuel standards. The author proposes three climate policy scenarios for 2020, concluding that a 'bottom-up' approach with increasing linkages between Canadian and U.S. cap-and-trade systems is the most likely outcome.

The report claims Shell is the most carbon-intensive oil company globally, with its production intensity projected to rise by 85% due to a shift toward oil sands, oil shale, and liquefied natural gas (LNG). It documents a history of gas flaring in Nigeria, alleging that internal documents show Shell prioritized profit over ending the practice. The report further asserts that Shell engages in 'greenwashing' by promoting limited renewable initiatives while lobbying against fuel quality directives and emissions trading reforms in the European Union and climate legislation in the United States.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) has withdrawn its membership from the IUCN, citing the IUCN's corporate partnership with Shell as the primary reason. FoEI argues that such partnerships serve as 'greenwash' for harmful corporate activities and undermine community struggles for environmental and human rights. The document highlights Shell's record on gas flaring, human rights abuses, and arctic drilling, and notes that a majority of IUCN non-government organizations and members voted to terminate the Shell agreement via Motion 107, though they were blocked by government delegates.

The document lists 22 provisions of a U.S. energy bill that the authors claim fail to address global warming or oil dependence. Key criticisms include the provision of billions in subsidies to the nuclear and coal industries, the weakening of the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act, and the reduction of state authority over liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities and transmission lines.

The report argues that environmental change acts as a 'threat multiplier' for Canadian security, particularly through the opening of Arctic shipping routes and the scramble for newly accessible oil and gas reserves. It highlights tensions with Denmark over Hans Island and the U.S. over the Northwest Passage. Internationally, it notes that climate-induced migration and resource conflicts increase the burden on Canadian peacekeeping and aid. Conversely, the report asserts that Canada's 'new security agenda'—focused on counter-terrorism and energy independence—often competes with environmental management, as seen in the push for oil sands development and the proposed militarization of the Great Lakes.

The author contends that 'peak oil'—the point of maximum conventional oil production—is an economic crisis of 'the end of cheap energy' that compounds the climate crisis. As conventional oil becomes harder to extract, the industry shifts to non-conventional sources like oil sands, which have a significantly lower Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROEI) and higher carbon emissions. The paper warns that relying on these sources or turning to coal to offset oil prices will hinder climate mitigation. To address this, the author highlights the 'Zero Carbon Britain' strategy and the 'Transition Towns' movement as models for moving toward a low-energy, sustainable future.

The document proposes the creation of an Environment Outlook for Canada (EOC), an integrated environmental assessment designed to move beyond traditional state-of-the-environment reporting by focusing on future-oriented scenarios. It details the potential scope of the EOC, including key topical issues like climate change and water quality, and suggests a time horizon of 20 to 30 years. The paper emphasizes the need for a participatory process involving policy-makers, shapers, and takers to ensure the assessment is salient, credible, and legitimate. It recommends a feasibility analysis and the development of a formal proposal by fall 2007, suggesting that the EOC could be hosted by an independent secretariat to maintain credibility.

The statement argues that NAFTA's current structure prioritizes corporate interests over the planet and calls for the removal of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions and the energy chapter to allow Canada to implement climate-friendly regulations and restrict fossil fuel exports.

The document highlights the severe health and environmental risks associated with the 300 square kilometers of tailings ponds in northern Alberta, noting unusually high cancer rates in Fort Chipewyan and the presence of toxic chemicals like arsenic and benzene. It criticizes the industry for underestimating air pollution and failing to report spills, while calling for an Indigenous-led health study and a moratorium on tailings pond growth.