Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that natural gas must be phased out alongside coal to limit global warming to 1.5˚C, warning that current investments in gas infrastructure risk creating stranded assets as the power sector transitions to carbon-free energy by 2050.

The document argues that while Africa has immense renewable energy potential, its transition to a low-carbon economy is hindered by fragmented governance, inadequate investment, and a reliance on hydrocarbon assets that risk becoming 'stranded'. It highlights the specific challenges in West Africa, where over 57% of the population lacks electricity access despite abundant solar, wind, and hydro resources. Using Nigeria as a case study, the briefing notes a trend toward decentralized solar projects in universities and businesses, but warns that these must be integrated into national grids to avoid inefficient clusters. The authors recommend that African governments prioritize robust, adapted technologies and align country-level actions with regional visions to build climate resilience.

ClientEarth has alerted Glencore and its investors to potential legal risks arising from the company's 2016 corporate reporting. The organization contends that Glencore's assertions—specifically that its coal assets will not become stranded and that demand will continue to grow—ignore critical market trends and independent analyses. ClientEarth highlights that the omission of disruptive factors, such as the rise of renewables and peaking demand in China, could be viewed as reckless or fraudulent under the UK's Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, potentially granting shareholders the right to claim compensation for losses.

The Stockholm Environment Institute U.S. has called on Vanguard to move away from a passive approach to shareholder voting regarding climate risk. The letter argues that the transition to a low-carbon economy, consistent with a 2 degrees C warming limit, poses material risks to the business models of fossil fuel companies like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips. It highlights that these companies are not systematically disclosing such risks, which could lead to stranded assets and market volatility. Consequently, the institute requests that Vanguard require its invested companies to provide annual disclosures on climate and transition risks.

ClientEarth urges the UK government to extend mandatory Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP3) reporting to all major financial regulators, including the FCA, FRC, tPR, and PPF, alongside the PRA. The document highlights that while the PRA previously reported on the insurance sector in 2015, systemic climate risks—including physical, transition, and liability risks—remain poorly understood across other financial sectors such as banking and pensions. It emphasizes the urgency of the 2017-2018 reporting cycle to prevent a five-year delay in addressing these vulnerabilities.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) argues that South Africa's draft Integrated Energy Plan (IEP) and Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Update are inconsistent with the Constitution, the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), and the National Energy Act (NEA). The CER contends that the plans unjustifiably constrain renewable energy while promoting new coal-fired power stations, which they claim cause severe health impacts and contribute to climate change. They highlight that coal-fired power is no longer the least-cost option and risks creating stranded assets. The document recommends removing build limits on wind and solar, excluding new coal and nuclear power, and conducting a comprehensive assessment of external social and environmental costs.

RMI defends its research on grid defection, asserting that while full disconnection from the utility may currently only be economical in Hawaii, the declining costs of distributed energy resources (DERs) create a risk of stranded utility assets. RMI critiques a Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) study for focusing only on present-day costs and a limited set of DER options, arguing that the threat of future defection empowers customers and necessitates reforms in utility business models and retail pricing to achieve an integrated, cost-optimal grid.

The document examines the Dutch coal experience, starting with the state-managed closure of domestic mines in Limburg (1965-1974) driven by the discovery of natural gas and political shifts. It details the social engineering and subsidies used to transition 75,000 workers, noting that while the region eventually diversified, the process was lengthy and marked by economic crises. The study then analyzes the 'return of coal' in the 1970s, where policy shifted toward imported coal to diversify energy security after the oil crises, leading to a lasting reliance on coal-fired power plants. It concludes that current climate targets and court rulings now clash with this path-dependency, creating a risk of stranded assets in modern coal plants.

The document analyzes the impact of 'fast depreciation' and 'uplift' tax provisions on the profitability of over 700 licensed but non-producing oil and gas fields in Norway. It finds that these measures significantly increase the internal rate of return (IRR) for investors, making many fields economic that would otherwise be abandoned. At an oil price of USD 50 per barrel, the analysis suggests 95% of new oil investment depends on these supports, which could lead to an additional 8 billion barrels of production and 2.9 billion metric tonnes of CO2 emissions.

The report examines the intersection of climate change and fiduciary duty for public pension fund trustees. It identifies four primary financial risks—physical impact, carbon asset, transition, and litigation—and argues that these risks necessitate the exercise of duties to inquire, monitor, diversify, and act impartially. The document suggests that failure to account for these risks may lead to lawsuits for breach of fiduciary duty, particularly regarding the interests of future beneficiaries. Recommended actions include modifying investment principles, divesting from climate-vulnerable assets, active shareholder engagement, and investing in clean energy.

A group of US investors filed a class action lawsuit against Exxon Mobil Corporation on 8 November 2016, alleging the company made "false and misleading statements" about climate change impacts to artificially inflate its value. The claim follows a 13% drop in stock price and reports that Exxon may need to write down nearly 20% of its oil and gas assets. The document warns that other oil majors, including Chevron, Oxy, ConocoPhilipps, Total, BP, and Shell, also show poor disclosure quality according to InfluenceMap, and urges investors to engage with companies to ensure robust disclosure of energy transition risks.

The report evaluates several major fossil fuel companies—including BP, Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Peabody Energy, Arch Coal, and CONSOL Energy—on their accountability regarding climate change. It uses a scoring system to measure the accuracy of their public statements, their governance policies to prevent disinformation, and their responses to shareholder resolutions. The findings indicate a wide disparity in corporate behavior, with some companies like Shell and BP acknowledging the need for emissions reductions, while others like ExxonMobil and Chevron are flagged for misrepresenting science or actively blocking shareholder efforts to address climate risks.

The document argues that voluntary ESG reporting is insufficient due to lack of comparability and completeness, and that mandatory disclosure is necessary to address material financial risks associated with climate change, resource scarcity, and social justice norms.

The San Giorgio Group (SGG) met in February 2016 to discuss moving climate finance from diplomacy to implementation following the Paris Agreement. Key discussions focused on the need for better tracking methodologies for the USD 100 billion goal, the role of cities in climate action, the use of climate risk insurance in vulnerable countries, and the application of innovative financial instruments like green bonds and YieldCos to scale up Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

ClientEarth and partners argue that climate change poses material financial risks to fossil fuel companies, potentially rendering a significant portion of reserves 'stranded'. They call on ESMA to enforce consistent regulatory reporting of these risks under the Transparency and Accounting Directives, aligning with global efforts like the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures.

The document examines the tension between treating fossil fuel suppliers as polluters and recognizing extraction as a sovereign right for development. It argues that meeting Paris Agreement targets requires leaving a majority of proven reserves in the ground, which would disproportionately impact lower-income regions through the loss of significant resource rents.

The document is a call to action by cleantech entrepreneurs and supporting organisations directed at COP21. It argues that viable solutions for decarbonisation already exist but are hindered by policy influence and capital allocation favouring the fossil fuel industry. The signatories demand a global shift to 100% renewable energy by 2050, the redirection of finance away from fossil fuels, and the implementation of science-based targets and carbon pricing.

The Coal Atlas 2015 examines the systemic damage caused by coal extraction and combustion, highlighting its role as a primary driver of global CO2 emissions and its associated health and human rights violations. It analyzes the economic instability of the 'carbon bubble' and the failure of technologies like carbon capture and storage, while documenting the rise of renewable energy and grassroots protests against the coal industry across various nations, including China, India, the US, Russia, and Germany.

The research paper argues that climate policy has historically over-emphasized demand-side measures, such as carbon pricing and energy efficiency, while neglecting the supply side of the fossil fuel economy. The authors identify three primary barriers to supply-side action: political opposition from powerful fossil fuel interests, territorial GHG accounting rules that under-credit supply-side reductions, and a common perception that restricting production merely causes 'leakage' to other regions. The paper proposes a typology of supply-side policies, including producer subsidy reform, conservation payments for leaving reserves undeveloped, and ring-fenced cap-and-trade systems for production rights. It suggests that integrating supply-side measures can widen the mitigation cost curve, reducing the cost of achieving emission targets and mitigating 'carbon lock-in' and 'stranded-asset' risks. The authors highlight the case of Norway, where a combined supply-demand strategy could potentially achieve global emission reductions at one-third the cost of a demand-only approach.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) analysis finds that two-thirds of U.S. states may be exposing electricity consumers to financial risks due to overreliance on natural gas. These risks include price volatility, potential carbon pricing costs, and the possibility of stranded assets such as underused plants and pipelines. The report rates states across five categories, identifying Florida as the only state with a "High" risk rating in all five. To mitigate these risks, the report advocates for prioritizing renewable energy and energy efficiency over natural gas as a primary solution for carbon reduction under the federal Clean Power Plan.