Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines 'coal transition credits' (CTCs) as a mechanism to accelerate the phase-out of coal-fired power plants in Southeast Asia. While proponents suggest CTCs can unlock private finance for early retirement and just transition measures, a survey of 10 experts reveals widespread skepticism. Key concerns include the risk of carbon leakage, where retired capacity is replaced by other fossil fuels, and the difficulty of establishing conservative baselines to prove additionality. Experts warn that CTCs could create perverse incentives, rewarding polluters and encouraging the delay of retirements to maximize credit issuance. Furthermore, the report highlights structural barriers in Southeast Asia, such as young coal plant fleets and rigid power purchase agreements, and notes that current methodologies, including Verra's VM0052, may have loopholes regarding 'captive' coal plants. The findings suggest that without rigorous guardrails and a focus on public finance, CTCs risk being a tool for greenwashing rather than a driver of genuine climate impact.

The report examines 'coal transition credits' (CTC)—carbon credits generated by retiring coal plants early and replacing them with renewables—as a way to fund the energy transition in Southeast Asia. Based on a survey of 10 experts, the document finds deep skepticism regarding the instrument's effectiveness. Key concerns include 'carbon leakage' (where retired capacity is replaced by other fossil fuels), the subjectivity of baseline scenarios leading to over-issuance, and the risk of 'greenwashing' or rewarding polluters. Experts highlight that only 2 out of 10 view CTCs as effective, warning that without strict safeguards, these credits could undermine genuine decarbonization and fail to provide a 'just transition' for affected workers and communities.

The report critiques 'coal transition offsets' (CTOs), specifically those promoted by the Rockefeller Foundation's Coal-to-Clean-Credit Initiative (CCCI) and Singapore's Traction Coalition. It argues that CTOs inherit the systemic failures of the broader carbon offset market, including non-additionality and over-crediting. Through analysis of pilot projects in the Philippines, the document demonstrates how CTOs may not actually accelerate plant closures and can create perverse incentives for policymakers to avoid mandating coal phaseouts. The author recommends shifting focus from individual plant buyouts to systemic energy reforms, such as grid modernization and the renegotiation of power purchase agreements (PPAs) to reduce the financial burden of retiring coal assets.

The document advocates for a science-based 2035 NDC for South Korea, proposing a minimum 61% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 2018. It emphasizes that clear, consistent policies across the power, industry, and transport sectors are essential to attract private investment and maintain global competitiveness, particularly in the face of regulations like the EU's CBAM. Key recommendations include accelerating renewable energy deployment to at least 100GW by 2030, phasing out coal power by 2035, strengthening the K-ETS carbon price, and accelerating the electrification of transport and heavy industry.

The document advocates for South Korea to set a 2035 emissions reduction target of at least 61% relative to 2018 levels to ensure alignment with its 2050 carbon neutrality goal. It emphasizes that a credible NDC must be supported by sectoral pathways in power, industry, and transport to provide the policy certainty required to unlock private sector investment. Key recommendations include phasing out coal power by 2035, reforming the Korea Emissions Trading System (K-ETS) to increase carbon price signals, and accelerating the deployment of breakthrough technologies like hydrogen steelmaking and electrified steam crackers. The briefing also stresses the importance of structured collaboration between the government, businesses of all sizes, and subnational authorities to ensure the NDC is investible and implementable.

The report finds that while green tax incentives are widely used in emerging and developing economies, there is a mismatch between the common reliance on profit-based incentives and the actual barriers to investment, such as high upfront capital costs. It argues that these tools are most effective when integrated into broader policy frameworks and transitioned toward market-based mechanisms as sectors mature.

The report examines 50 years of Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) development, synthesizing data from 103 projects to identify trends in drilling speed, cost, and production. It highlights a shift toward commercial viability driven by oil and gas techniques, such as horizontal drilling and multi-well pads, and notes a surge in power purchase agreements (PPAs) totaling over 610 MWe. The analysis emphasizes that while incremental and step-change innovations have improved performance, further research into superhot rock and better data transparency are needed for global scaling.

The briefing identifies regulatory uncertainty, slow permitting, and the lack of a cohesive strategy as primary barriers to geothermal energy in California. It proposes establishing a statewide strategic plan, streamlining environmental reviews, updating decades-old well regulations to accommodate next-generation technologies, reforming interconnection and resource adequacy frameworks to reflect year-round value, and increasing funding for high-upfront pre-development costs.

The report analyzes green hydrogen production in India, finding that state-level transmission waivers and capital subsidies are critical for cost competitiveness. It compares on-site, ISTS-connected, and STU-connected project models, highlighting that while on-site projects avoid transmission costs, they face land and demand constraints. The study identifies Odisha as a leader in cost competitiveness due to aggressive incentive packages and emphasizes that off-site projects require at least a 50% cost reduction to compete with grey hydrogen.

The document argues that while Africa possesses immense renewable energy potential, over 600 million people lack electricity, and only 2% of global renewable energy investments in the last two decades have gone to the continent. It identifies critical barriers to private sector engagement, including currency mismatch, regulatory instability, and inadequate grid infrastructure. Using Nigeria as a case study, the report highlights the success of off-grid solar solutions compared to the struggling privatised on-grid sector. It recommends institutionalising predictable policies, expanding innovative finance like green bonds and blended finance, and investing in grid-compatible infrastructure and local technical capacity to accelerate the energy transition.

The Corporate Responsibility Monitor 2025 finds that the tech sector faces a credibility crisis as AI growth drives exponential energy demand and emissions. The report argues that current accounting practices, which favor market-based over location-based reporting, obscure the true environmental impact of tech giants. While some companies like Google, Microsoft, and Apple show early leadership in renewable energy procurement and supply chain employment, the sector generally lacks transparency regarding third-party data centers, mineral sourcing, and device lifespans. The document calls for the GHG-Protocol and SBTi to mandate location-based reporting and for companies to adopt 24/7 renewable energy procurement targets to align with a 1.5°C pathway.

The report argues that rapid declines in battery costs have made near-continuous solar power (24/365 generation) an economic reality in sunny regions. In cities like Las Vegas, achieving 97% reliability for a constant power supply is now cost-competitive at $104/MWh, which is cheaper than new coal and nuclear power. The analysis demonstrates that a relatively small amount of storage—approximately 17 kWh of battery for every 1 kW of stable 24-hour power—is sufficient for most sunny locations. This shift allows solar to support 24/7 clean energy contracts for energy-intensive industries and significantly reduces the need for expensive grid expansions by allowing more capacity to be installed behind existing connections.

The report emphasizes that grid capacity is now a primary driver for data centre investment in Europe. To avoid downgraded forecasts and remain competitive in the global AI race, the author recommends that governments treat grids as strategic infrastructure. Key proposals include the creation of priority AI zones outside congested capital cities, joint spatial planning to locate demand nodes near clean energy sources, and the implementation of non-firm grid connection options to reduce queues. Additionally, the document calls for increased research into data centre flexibility and improved data availability regarding demand profiles and grid capacity maps to inform planning and policy.

Ember expresses two primary concerns regarding India's draft VPPA framework: its potential to undermine power system flexibility and its role as a potentially misleading accounting mechanism for corporate clean energy claims. The organization argues that VPPAs may encourage continued investment in 'plain vanilla' solar without storage, exacerbating midday surpluses and grid balancing challenges. Ember also contends that VPPAs allow industrial consumers to claim 100% renewable energy usage through Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) without physically consuming clean power or contributing to grid stability, potentially diverting investment away from genuine 24/7 clean energy solutions.

The report argues for a 'hybrid market model' in Europe that combines proactive procurement for the market with competition in the market to ensure a reliable, 24/7 decarbonised power system. It identifies significant gaps in current National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs), noting that many Member States are not on track to meet 2030 EU targets. To address this, the authors recommend expanding system needs assessments to include flexibility and resilience (including climate and cyber risks) and extending their time horizon to 2050. On the contracting side, the report suggests enhancing Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) through standardisation and public demand, and improving Contracts for Difference (CfDs) by embedding dispatch incentives to avoid distorting market signals. It also proposes a tripartite contracting framework involving a central public entity to hedge risks for both the state and industrial consumers, thereby fostering industrial electrification and competitiveness.

The Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor (v5.0) establishes a framework to distinguish genuine corporate climate leadership from greenwashing. It assesses companies across four pillars: comprehensive GHG emissions disclosure (Scopes 1, 2, and 3), the alignment of emission reduction targets with 1.5°C pathways, the implementation of sector-specific transitions, and the scaling of durable carbon dioxide removals (CDR). The guidance emphasizes that net-zero claims are misleading without deep absolute reductions and argues against the use of standalone Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and traditional offsetting in favor of 'climate contributions' and millennial-scale durable CDR.

The report argues that ASEAN's data centre industry requires a more diverse range of corporate renewable procurement options and stronger national sustainability frameworks to ensure sustainable growth. It evaluates various mechanisms—such as Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), green tariffs, and Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)—noting that limited availability of these options, particularly in countries like Indonesia, hinders investment. The text emphasizes that national frameworks are essential for managing energy transition risks and improving data transparency, as international standards are not always tailored to regional needs.

The report examines the surge in data centre development in Southeast Asia, highlighting how increasing electricity demand—particularly in Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines—threatens climate targets due to reliance on fossil-fuel-dominated grids. It argues that without significant investment in solar and wind energy and improved energy efficiency, the digital boom will lead to a substantial rise in greenhouse gas emissions.

The report highlights that data centres in ASEAN could account for 2% to 30% of national power demand by 2030, risking a significant increase in emissions, particularly in Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. It argues that approximately 30% of this demand can be met by solar and wind via grids without battery storage. The document advocates for more accessible corporate Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), national sustainability frameworks, and advanced cooling technologies to ensure the sector's growth does not derail regional decarbonisation targets.

The briefing distinguishes between attributional accounting, which allocates emissions responsibility, and consequential assessment, which estimates how specific corporate actions change total greenhouse gas emissions. It argues that while attributional reporting is necessary for inventories, it fails to quantify real-world abatement or value actions like grid storage. By adopting modernized consequential methods, companies can prioritize interventions—such as siting solar projects in coal-heavy regions—that drive faster grid decarbonization.