Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of NGOs, including Reclaim Finance and Urgewald, wrote to the CEOs of ten insurance companies (including Allianz, AXA, and Munich Re) demanding they stop insuring the Brunsbüttel LNG terminal in northern Germany. The authors argue that the project, promoted by Gasunie, will lock in greenhouse gas emissions for 30–50 years, contradicting the 1.5°C goal and risking the creation of a stranded asset. They highlight that the project costs €450 million, with up to €100 million from German taxpayers, and faces significant opposition from environmental groups and market analysts.

The report argues that the food industry's reliance on single-use plastics creates significant ecological and health crises while exposing the sector and its financiers to material financial risks. It highlights a 'financial bubble' in the plastics industry driven by overproduction and impending regulation. Research reveals that seven banks operating in Belgium provided over 78 billion euros in financing to nine food industry companies between 2015 and 2021, with Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas, and ING as the primary financiers. The document calls for banks to implement concrete plastic policies and for the Belgian government to use its influence as a shareholder to drive a transition toward a circular economy.

Coal producers in the US and Canada plan to invest $4.8 billion USD in 15 new metallurgical coal mines to produce 38 million tonnes annually for export, primarily to Asia Pacific markets. However, Global Energy Monitor argues these projects face high risks of economic and regulatory stranding. The global steel industry is under pressure to shift from coal-based blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) processes to lower-emissions alternatives like electric arc furnaces (EAF) and direct reduced iron (DRI) to meet net-zero targets. Major importers such as China, Japan, South Korea, and India have committed to carbon reduction, while domestic steel production in the US and Canada is already declining or transitioning away from coal. Furthermore, existing reserves in North America are sufficient to sustain current production levels until at least 2032, making new capacity largely unnecessary.

The document assesses the proliferation of gas power plants, pipelines, and LNG terminals across East, South, and Southeast Asia. It contends that these investments, totaling $380 billion, risk becoming stranded assets as renewable energy costs plummet and climate targets necessitate a rapid shift away from fossil fuels. The report highlights the significant carbon budget impact of these projects and the continued role of public finance in supporting gas expansion despite net-zero pledges.

The report analyzes the planned expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia, including power plants, pipelines, and LNG terminals, totaling $379 billion. It argues that this expansion risks locking in high greenhouse gas emissions, potentially consuming a quarter of the global carbon budget for a 1.5°C limit. The document highlights that falling costs of renewable energy and high price volatility of LNG make these gas investments economically risky and likely to become stranded assets. It further criticizes the continued support of public financial institutions for gas projects and advocates for a transition to clean energy portfolios.

The report analyzes plans for US$379 billion in new gas infrastructure across Asia, including 320 GW of power plants and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity. It argues that this expansion would consume a quarter of the global carbon budget for a 1.5°C limit and warns that these assets may become economically unviable due to the falling cost of renewables and LNG price volatility. The author calls for a redirection of public finance away from gas to align with net-zero goals.

The report argues that the planned $379 billion expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia threatens the global goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C and risks creating stranded assets. It highlights that the region is planning 320 GW of new gas-fired power and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity, which could emit up to 117 Gt CO2-eq over their lifespans. The document contends that renewable energy is now a more cost-effective and reliable alternative, and calls for the redirection of public finance away from gas to support net-zero goals.

The report identifies a massive planned expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia, including 320 GW of power plants and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity, valued at 379 billion USD. It argues these investments risk becoming stranded assets as renewable energy costs plummet and climate targets necessitate a rapid decline in fossil fuel use. The document highlights that the projected emissions from this infrastructure could consume 25% of the remaining global carbon budget for 1.5°C. It further criticizes the continued role of public financial institutions in funding these projects, suggesting a shift toward clean energy portfolios as a more secure and sustainable alternative.

The report argues that the planned $379 billion investment in Asian gas infrastructure is an economically risky and environmentally damaging strategy that threatens the global goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C. It highlights that the scale of planned LNG import capacity in Asia could absorb more than the entire 2020 global LNG trade volume, potentially locking in high emissions for decades. The document contends that renewable energy portfolios, combined with storage and demand-side management, are now more cost-effective and reliable alternatives to gas, rendering new gas projects likely to become stranded assets. It further criticizes the continued role of public financial institutions in funding these projects, urging a shift toward net-zero aligned investments.

The report analyzes the expansion of gas power plants, pipelines, and LNG terminals across East, South, and Southeast Asia, totaling $379 billion in planned investments. It argues that this expansion is incompatible with the 1.5°C climate goal, as the resulting emissions could consume 25% of the global carbon budget. The document highlights the economic risk of these projects becoming stranded assets due to the falling cost of renewable energy and the volatility of LNG prices. It concludes that clean energy portfolios, combining renewables with storage and demand management, are more cost-effective and secure alternatives to gas.

The report identifies a massive planned expansion of gas infrastructure in Asia, totaling US$379 billion, which includes 320 GW of power plants, 63,000 km of pipelines, and 452 mtpa of LNG import capacity. It argues that this expansion would consume approximately one-quarter of the global carbon budget required to limit warming to 1.5°C and warns that these projects are economically risky compared to cheaper renewable alternatives. The document highlights the role of public financing from institutions like the Export-Import Bank of China and the Asian Development Bank in sustaining this growth, while urging a shift toward clean energy portfolios.

The report describes the 'Blue Acceleration,' a phenomenal increase in the diversity and scale of ocean-based industries since 2000. It argues that while the ocean is viewed as an economic frontier, the benefits flow disproportionately to a small number of powerful states and corporations, leaving SIDS and LDCs exposed to risks. The document details the environmental and social impacts of sectors like offshore wind, deep-sea mining, and industrial fishing, while highlighting the emergence of interconnected 'Anthropocene risks' including climate-driven regime shifts and stranded assets. It concludes by exploring the role of sustainable finance in redirecting the ocean economy toward equity and stewardship.

The report analyzes the energy portfolios of ten major private equity firms, finding that 80% of their energy assets are in fossil fuels. It highlights that these investments often yield low returns and disproportionately impact communities of color, while the industry's private nature allows these activities to avoid the public scrutiny faced by publicly traded oil majors.

The report analyzes the European Central Bank's (ECB) corporate asset purchases during the Covid-19 pandemic, specifically under the Corporate Sector Purchase Program (CSPP) and the Pandemic Emergency Purchase Program (PEPP). It finds that the ECB increased its holdings of bonds from five oil and gas majors—Shell, TotalEnergies, Repsol, Eni, and OMV—between April 2020 and September 2021. The author argues that these companies' investment plans are incompatible with 1.5C or 2C warming limits, as they continue to expand fossil fuel production and invest in liquified natural gas (LNG) and unconventional sources. The report criticizes the ECB's July 2021 climate roadmap for being 'dangerously imprecise' and for delaying the implementation of climate criteria for asset purchases until 2023. It concludes that the ECB must immediately exclude fossil fuel developers from its corporate purchases and collateral framework to avoid supporting 'stranded' assets and systemic climate risk.

Over 200 civil society organizations are urging world leaders to stop international public finance for fossil fuels, noting that G20 members provide USD 77 billion annually to fossil fuels compared to USD 28 billion for clean energy. The statement calls for an immediate end to support for the entire fossil fuel value chain, the closure of financial loopholes, and increased climate finance for low-income countries in the Global South to ensure a just energy transition ahead of COP 26.

Carbon Market Watch criticises a proposal by fifteen Members of the European Parliament to incentivise CCS and CCU within the EU carbon market. The organisation distinguishes between carbon removals, which physically remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, and CCS/CCU, which typically only capture emissions from industrial sources. It warns that promoting CCS/CCU could lead to greenwashing, stranded assets, and delayed emissions, particularly in the power sector. The document specifically highlights the risks of BECCS and waste-to-energy CCS, citing deforestation linked to the Drax power plant. It concludes that the EU carbon market must focus on reducing emissions at the source and that public funding should only support mature, transparently assessed carbon removal technologies.

The report evaluates three primary responses to the plastics crisis: chemical recycling, separate collection, and reuse/refill. It concludes that chemical recycling is technically and financially unviable, often serving as a 'smokescreen' for the petrochemical industry. In contrast, it identifies high growth potential in separate collection infrastructure, specifically reverse vending machines (RVMs), and long-term equity opportunities in refillable packaging systems, both of which are being driven by increasing global regulation and consumer pressure.

The document warns investors against chemical recycling due to high energy intensity and technical failures, while recommending separate collection (specifically reverse vending machines) and reuse-and-refill systems as high-growth, low-risk opportunities driven by regulatory shifts and consumer demand.

The Russian coal sector provides a low economic contribution to the national GDP but maintains high social and political significance, particularly in regions like Kuzbass. Despite this, the sector is heavily reliant on indirect state subsidies and faces a deteriorating infrastructure, with the average age of coal power plants reaching 53 years. The report highlights a disconnect between the Russian government's expectations of export growth and the reality of decarbonization trends in key markets such as the EU, China, and India. It argues that Russia lacks an official decarbonization scenario and that conservative views currently dominate policy, ignoring the risks of stranded assets and the impact of the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The authors propose a 'just transition' framework consisting of social programs for workers, regional economic diversification, and the introduction of an internal carbon price.

The document analyzes coal finance in 18 high-impact countries (HICs) with significant electricity access gaps. It finds that while global coal investment is declining, finance persists in HICs, largely driven by Chinese state-owned institutions and a few South Asian nations. The report argues that coal is misaligned with Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7) due to long development timelines and high infrastructure costs, contrasting this with the efficiency of distributed renewable energy. It highlights the risk of stranded assets in Bangladesh and Pakistan and the operational hurdles facing coal in Africa, concluding that a shift toward renewables and finance-based carbon accounting is necessary to achieve net-zero goals.