Search Climate Insights Directory

The document analyzes the Global Biodiversity Framework, noting that while Target 4 promotes urgent measures to prevent species extinction and Target 3 emphasizes effective protected area management, the framework is flawed by an implicit reliance on biodiversity offsetting. The author argues that offsetting is a harmful practice that fails to address root causes of biodiversity loss and may justify the destruction of nature. Key gaps include the lack of explicit bans on high-impact activities like deep-sea mining and Arctic drilling, and a failure to adequately link conservation to industrial agriculture and fossil fuel extraction.

The document evaluates the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), noting that while Target 4 supports preventing species extinction and Target 3 emphasizes quality in conserved areas, the framework is undermined by the implicit enablement of offsetting. The author argues that the GBF lacks clear prohibitions on destructive activities like deep-sea mining and fails to adequately link conservation to industrial drivers of biodiversity loss. It suggests that civil society can use the GBF's targets on restoration and governance to hold governments accountable.

The report inventories major energy subsidies in South Africa, detailing fiscal support for oil, gas, electricity, coal, and nuclear energy. It highlights a significant increase in total quantified subsidies, reaching ZAR 118,317 million in FY 2022/2023, driven largely by carbon tax exemptions. The document describes specific mechanisms such as VAT exemptions for fuels, Free Basic Electricity for disadvantaged households, and various grants for state-owned enterprises like PetroSA and Eskom.

The document analyzes the limitations of both shareholder engagement and full divestment in the oil and gas sector, citing recent moves by Dutch pension funds PFZW and ABP. It argues that while divestment may not provide immediate financial pressure on companies, total withdrawal removes necessary levers of influence. Reclaim Finance proposes a strategy of stopping new capital injections (specifically new bonds) while using voting rights to block 'climaticide' strategies, including voting against director re-elections and dividend distributions.

Reclaim Finance argues that current investor engagement strategies, including the Climate Action 100+ initiative, have failed to produce meaningful climate action from the oil and gas sector. The organization highlights that most companies continue fossil fuel expansion and maintain minimal investment in clean energy despite high profits. Consequently, Reclaim Finance calls on asset managers to escalate their tactics by suspending new investments, voting against strategic routine resolutions, and issuing public statements to sanction companies that refuse to stop developing new upstream and midstream projects.

Reclaim Finance argues that neither passive engagement nor complete divestment is sufficient to force oil and gas companies to align with the Paris Agreement. Instead, it advocates for a 'third way' where investors stop purchasing new bonds but retain shareholdings to vote against directors, manager remuneration, and dividends at 2024 annual general meetings. The organization highlights that 96% of oil and gas producing companies continue to open new fields and that record profits are being prioritized for shareholder remuneration over the energy transition.

The report identifies methane emissions from the oil and gas sector as a critical near-term climate risk and opportunity. It proposes a strategic framework based on emissions visibility, policy action, market activation, and accountability to drive the industry toward 'near-zero' leakage. Key recommendations include the adoption of low-methane procurement standards by governments and utilities, the use of third-party certifications like MiQ, and the implementation of policies to plug marginal wells. The document highlights recent regulatory moves in the U.S. and EU, and international initiatives like the MMRV and CLEAN frameworks, as essential steps to tip global gas markets toward low-emissions supplies.

The document is a statement of solidarity with a general strike in Argentina on January 24, 2024. It criticizes the government of Javier Milei for implementing the Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) and the 'Omnibus Law', which the author argues undermine national sovereignty and democratic rights. Key concerns include a 51% currency devaluation, the privatization of 41 state-owned companies, the repeal of laws protecting glaciers and native forests, and the creation of a domestic greenhouse gas emission market. The statement calls for the repeal of a security protocol prohibiting public demonstrations and urges international solidarity to protect the rights of the Argentine people.

Friends of the Earth International supports a general strike in Argentina on January 24, 2024, protesting President Javier Milei's 'Omnibus Law' and Emergency Decree (DNU). The organization criticizes the government's economic shock measures, the privatization of 41 state companies, and the repeal of laws protecting glaciers and native forests. It specifically condemns the creation of a national greenhouse gas emissions market and the restriction of the right to protest.

Friends of the Earth International supports a general strike in Argentina on January 24, 2024, protesting the 'Ley Ómnibus' and a Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) issued by President Javier Milei. The organization condemns measures including a 51% currency devaluation, the privatization of 41 state companies, the dismantling of social ministries, and the creation of a domestic greenhouse gas emissions market. It further denounces the government's 'Protocolo del Ministerio de Seguridad' for restricting the right to public protest and calls for international solidarity to protect democratic and environmental rights in Argentina.

The Canadian Climate Institute examines how to integrate oil and gas decarbonization projects into a proposed national Climate Investment Taxonomy. While most global taxonomies focus on 'green' labels for net-zero activities, the authors advocate for a 'transition' category to unlock funding for hard-to-decarbonize sectors. The paper suggests a high-bar approach using specific criteria to ensure projects align with 1.5°C pathways and avoid carbon lock-in, focusing on three key areas: Scope 3 emissions risks, the distinction between new and existing facilities, and the alignment of project lifespans with climate targets.

ClientEarth proposes a series of legislative reforms for the UK to accelerate its transition to net zero by 2050 and protect biodiversity. Key recommendations include the introduction of an Environmental Rights Bill to comply with the Aarhus Convention, the implementation of mandatory corporate transition plans, and a ban on fossil fuel advertising and carbon offsetting. The document also calls for the UK to withdraw from the Energy Charter Treaty, accelerate fine particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution reduction targets to 2030, and ensure 30% of land and sea are effectively protected by 2030. Additionally, it urges the government to address the 'Dieselgate' scandal by supporting affected consumers and funding a clean-up fund.

The report argues that the fossil fuel industry has shifted from outright climate denial to a strategy of 'duplicity,' using greenwashing and misleading claims to protect profits while expanding fossil fuel production. It details how companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, and Chevron overstate their clean energy investments, set unrealistic or retracted emissions goals, promote unviable 'false solutions' such as carbon capture and algae biofuels, use front groups to lobby against climate policy, and shift responsibility for emissions onto individual consumers.

The paper examines the 'petroculture' of Norway, where oil is treated as a 'sacramental substance' and a guarantor of prosperity. It analyzes how the oil industry and political actors use 'oil myths'—narratives that frame oil as a savior—to maintain social acceptance for continued extraction and to resist energy transition. The author argues that this 'petromania' creates a psychological and cultural barrier to climate action, often framing the phase-out of oil as a betrayal of national identity and the workers who built the nation's wealth.

The document presents a series of demands from African environmental defenders, calling for the recognition of their human rights, the creation of a legally binding regional treaty for their protection, and an end to 'false solutions' in climate change. It advocates for a transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, the cessation of militarized conservation in favor of community-led models, and the implementation of redress mechanisms to hold governments and businesses accountable for human rights violations. The text emphasizes the need for the meaningful inclusion of women, youth, and indigenous peoples in the management of natural resources and climate mitigation efforts.

Earthjustice argues that the American Convention on Human Rights requires States to implement a just transition to clean energy based on their 'fair share' of historical and current emissions. The brief advocates for the immediate phase-out of fossil fuel extraction and power generation, the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, and the mandatory use of comprehensive climate assessments—including scope 3 emissions—for all new energy projects and policies. It emphasizes that human rights obligations may necessitate more ambitious mitigation than those outlined in the Paris Agreement and warns against 'false solutions' like carbon capture and storage.

Reclaim Finance argues that Crédit Agricole's new climate commitments are insufficient because they do not explicitly ban the financing of new oil and gas infrastructure, such as LNG terminals. While the bank increased its target for reducing financed emissions from oil and gas loans to 75% by 2030, the organization notes that this does not guarantee an end to support for companies developing new fossil projects. The statement highlights specific examples of continued involvement, including the Port Arthur LNG terminal in the US and advisory services for the Papua LNG project, and criticizes the exclusion of only independent extraction companies while sparing integrated oil majors.

The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) views Canada's new oil and gas emissions cap framework as a necessary foundation for a sector-specific cap-and-trade system, but warns that the proposed 2030 reduction target of 16-20% relative to 2005 levels is insufficient compared to the broader economy-wide goal of 40-45%. The IISD expresses concern over compliance flexibilities, such as carbon offsets and decarbonization fund payments, which it argues may undermine actual emissions reductions. To align with the 2022 Emissions Reduction Plan, the IISD recommends strengthening the 2030 target toward a 40% reduction and minimizing the use of offsets.

Methane is a potent climate pollutant responsible for 30 percent of the earth's temperature rise since the Industrial era. In the oil and gas sector, methane leakage can make natural gas as damaging as coal in the near term, with some US Gulf of Mexico offshore platforms showing leakage rates up to 66 percent. Despite the fact that many leaks can be repaired cost-effectively, the document notes that companies are not moving quickly enough, particularly in the US Permian Basin. The author advocates for mandatory requirements and the expanded use of aerial and satellite detection to increase transparency and enforce standards.

The 2023 Production Gap Report reveals that governments plan to produce approximately 110% more fossil fuels by 2030 than is consistent with the 1.5°C temperature limit. Specifically, projections indicate 460% more coal, 29% more oil, and 82% more gas in 2030 compared to the 1.5°C pathway. The report notes that while major producers have pledged net-zero emissions, none have committed to production reductions aligned with the 1.5°C goal. To mitigate risks, the report recommends a near total phase-out of coal by 2040 and a three-quarters reduction in oil and gas production by 2050 from 2020 levels.