Search Climate Insights Directory

Ohio is experiencing an increase in the frequency and severity of extreme precipitation, flooding, heat, and drought, with natural disaster costs reaching $2 to $5 billion in the first half of 2026. These hazards are compounded by aging infrastructure, including high-hazard dams and levees, and a legacy of industrial pollution from Superfund sites. The state's energy grid is under strain from extreme heat and surging demand from over 200 data centers, while state policy continues to favor fossil fuels and obstruct renewable energy development. Key military assets, such as Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, face significant flood and wildfire risks. While Ohio lacks a comprehensive statewide climate governance framework, some progress has been made through municipal adaptation plans and significant support from federal agencies like NOAA, FEMA, and the EPA.

The report argues that the IMF's 'climate turn' is contradictory, as its conventional lending programmes (Upper Credit Tranche) often prioritize fiscal consolidation and extractive industries, undermining the climate goals of the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF). Through case studies in Ecuador, Egypt, the DRC, Tanzania, and Pakistan, the document demonstrates how IMF-mandated expenditure compression and reliance on fossil fuel exports create structural climate vulnerabilities. Key findings indicate that while the IMF has improved its climate analysis, this does not translate into programme design, which continues to favor private investment and cost recovery over the public investment needed for a just transition.

Reclaim Finance criticizes the Council of the European Union for proposing that "transition" funds under the SFDR be available to oil and gas companies, provided they meet a 20% EU Taxonomy capex threshold and set Scope 1 and 2 targets. The author contends this position, influenced by lobbying from entities like TotalEnergies and the French government, ignores Scope 3 emissions and allows continued fossil fuel expansion. The document calls on the European Parliament to exclude companies developing new oil and gas projects from such funds to ensure the credibility of sustainable finance.

The document examines the implications of the Angera Declaration for Africa, noting that the agreement's call for coordinated technological and political action aligns with existing regional initiatives like the African Methane Community of Practice (AMCoP) and the African Clean Air Program (ACAP).

The document outlines Uganda's transition to multiparty democracy and its current governance structure. It details the country's natural resource wealth, specifically the discovery of oil reserves on Lake Albert and the planned East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), while noting environmental opposition from the European Union Parliament. The text also traces Uganda's economic planning from early independence through to Vision 2040 and the current Third National Development Plan (NDPIII), which focuses on resource-led industrialisation to achieve upper-middle-income status by 2040.

The document outlines a comprehensive framework for LDAR programs, emphasizing that well-implemented programs can reduce methane leaks by nearly 80%. It details the technical application of OGI cameras, a structured nine-step survey process—from planning to data reporting—and a typology of common leak sources such as valves, flanges, and compressor seals. The guide also provides regulatory benchmarks for survey frequency, repair timelines, and reporting templates to ensure accountability and effectiveness in methane mitigation.

The document analyzes methane emissions in Algeria's oil and gas sector, estimating annual emissions at 2,304 kt. It finds that 41% of these emissions can be abated using low-cost technologies, with the highest potential coming from eliminating unlit flaring and implementing leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs. The analysis highlights that the lack of a dedicated methane regulatory framework and low domestic gas prices hinder mitigation, while the EU Methane Regulation presents a significant external driver for alignment to maintain market access.

The document analyzes methane abatement in Egypt's oil and gas sector, identifying a technical abatement potential of 35% of estimated emissions using four key technologies. All analyzed measures fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/t CH4, with leak detection and repair (LDAR) and the elimination of unlit flaring offering the most significant opportunities. The analysis highlights that the economic viability of these measures depends heavily on the ability to monetize recovered gas, which is currently hindered by infrastructure gaps and low domestic gas prices. While Egypt lacks a dedicated methane regulatory framework, the document notes a recent agreement to develop a methane reduction roadmap and recommends prioritizing low-cost measures like LDAR and flaring monitoring in the near term.

The document analyzes methane emissions in Libya's oil and gas sector, estimating annual emissions at 1,221 kt. It finds that 55% of these emissions can be abated using four specific technologies—leak detection and repair (LDAR), vapor recovery units (VRU), replacing gas-driven pneumatic equipment, and improving flaring practices—all of which fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/t CH4. The largest potential for reduction comes from eliminating unlit flaring in the onshore upstream segment. However, implementation is hindered by the lack of a dedicated methane regulatory framework, aging infrastructure, and import restrictions on specialized equipment. The report highlights that the EU Methane Regulation poses a future risk to Libyan exports starting in 2027, urging the adoption of flaring performance standards and financial incentives to meet a 2030 zero-flaring ambition.

The document analyzes methane abatement in Mexico's oil and gas sector, finding that 34% of estimated emissions can be reduced using low-cost technologies. While Mexico has a robust regulatory framework, implementation is hindered by enforcement capacity and infrastructure gaps. The most significant abatement potential lies in improving offshore flaring practices, while midstream leak detection and repair (LDAR) can offer negative abatement costs due to the monetization of recovered gas.

The document analyzes methane abatement in Nigeria's oil and gas sector, focusing on four technologies: leak detection and repair (LDAR), vapor recovery units (VRU), replacement of natural gas-driven pneumatic equipment, and improved flaring practices. It finds that 30% of estimated emissions (53.5 Mt CO2e) are technically abatable using these technologies, with 28% falling below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/t CH4. The analysis highlights that the economics of abatement depend heavily on the ability to monetize recovered gas, with some measures showing negative costs. While Nigeria has a regulatory framework targeting zero routine flaring by 2030, implementation is uneven, particularly between onshore and offshore assets. The report recommends strengthening enforcement, developing measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) systems, and utilizing targeted financial instruments like concessional loans to overcome barriers such as high import costs and infrastructure gaps.

The report evaluates methane abatement in Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Ghana, Libya, Mexico, and Nigeria, focusing on leak detection and repair (LDAR), vapor recovery units (VRUs), improved flaring practices, and replacing gas-driven pneumatic equipment. Using a bottom-up marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) approach, the study finds that most mitigation measures fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/tCH4 (20 USD/tCO2e). The economic viability of these measures is heavily dependent on the ability to monetize recovered gas, with LDAR and pneumatic equipment replacement often yielding negative marginal costs (net savings) when gas prices are sufficiently high. The report identifies significant structural barriers, including infrastructure gaps and limited local technical capacity, and recommends a combination of regulatory frameworks, targeted financial incentives, and infrastructure investment to accelerate deployment.

The document analyzes methane abatement through improved flaring practices in nine African and Latin American countries. It identifies removing unlit flaring as a priority low-cost action and notes that while most measures fall below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/tCH4, costs vary by country based on flaring volumes per site. Key barriers include regulatory focuses on flaring volumes rather than efficiency and high operation and maintenance requirements.

The document evaluates the replacement of methane-bleeding pneumatic devices in the oil and gas sector with electric or instrument air systems. It finds that while adoption is already medium-to-high in several assessed countries, the remaining abatement potential is cost-effective, with instrument air systems often falling below a low-cost threshold of 596 USD/tCH4. Key barriers to further deployment include technical constraints at aging facilities and weak economic incentives where gas has low commercial value.

The report argues that current transition finance frameworks lack the systemic safeguards necessary to prevent carbon lock-in, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors. It proposes moving from asset-level financing to a systemic approach underpinned by Paris-aligned, subnational net-zero pathways. The document examines the gap between corporate transition plans and the requirements for credible transition finance, noting that many high-emitting oil, gas, and agrifood entities lack mature strategies. It advocates for the use of Paris-aligned taxonomies to ensure that use-of-proceeds (UoP) instruments drive genuine decarbonisation without creating 'dead-end pathways'.

The statement asserts that the destruction of nature and attacks on its defenders are part of the same corporate machinery. It highlights the experience of the A’i Cofán people in Ecuador facing oil extraction and argues that voluntary corporate sustainability commitments are insufficient to protect biodiversity or human rights. The author calls for a legally binding international instrument to regulate transnational corporations.

The author refutes industry claims that industrial carbon pricing is unaffordable or harmful to competitiveness, noting that the cost for Alberta's oil sands producers would be less than 50 cents a barrel by 2030. The text highlights that carbon pricing is increasing globally, covering nearly 30 per cent of global GHG emissions, and is necessary to avoid carbon border tariffs from jurisdictions like the EU. It concludes that a strong industrial carbon market in Alberta is critical for Canada to reach net zero by 2050.

The author refutes industry claims that industrial carbon pricing is unaffordable or detrimental to competitiveness, noting that the cost for Alberta oil sands producers would be less than 50 cents per barrel by 2030. Analysis of 17 years of provincial trade data shows no statistically significant contraction in exports linked to carbon pricing. The text highlights that global carbon pricing coverage has increased from 12% of emissions in 2015 to nearly 30% today, with the EU implementing border carbon tariffs. The author concludes that a robust industrial carbon market in Alberta is critical for Canada's trajectory toward carbon neutrality by 2050.

The document provides a technical annex detailing how the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) calculated the energy, economic, and emissions profiles of nine major Indian state-owned enterprises for FY 2024–25. It specifies the PSUs covered—including Coal India Limited, NTPC, and ONGC—and explains the methodology for estimating Scope 3 emissions, energy flows, and progress toward net-zero and renewable energy targets.

The document analyzes the proposed changes to Mozambique's Petroleum Law, arguing that while the government aims to attract investment and economic development, the law remains vague on community rights. It emphasizes that legally binding agreements between oil companies and affected populations are only effective if communities have independent legal and technical support. The text warns that the inclusion of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) may be used to justify continued fossil fuel extraction without addressing the costs borne by local populations. It calls for 'real consultations' and specific, verifiable benefit-sharing mechanisms to ensure that extractive wealth does not solely benefit the elite while locals suffer land loss and pollution.