Search Climate Insights Directory

The report finds that 2019 EU ETS emissions fell by 7.8% to 1612 million tonnes of CO2. While coal power emissions have dropped 43% since 2013, the power sector still accounts for 52% of total ETS emissions. Notably, coal-fired blast furnaces in the steel sector have become the largest emitters in seven countries, including the UK, France, and Spain.

The report finds that 75% of registered U.S. voters believe global warming is happening, with strong bipartisan support for renewable energy research and the Paris Climate Agreement. However, significant polarization remains regarding the causes of global warming and the Green New Deal, with Democrats viewing climate change as a much higher voting priority than Republicans.

The report examines the procurement processes of vertically integrated utilities in the United States, highlighting how monopsony power and financial incentives often lead to the over-procurement of capacity and a bias toward self-built, gas-fired generation. Using Xcel Colorado as a model, the authors recommend five best practices for regulators: determining technology-neutral needs through resource planning, requiring competitive all-source bidding with robust evaluation, conducting advance review of procurement terms, ensuring utility ownership does not conflict with competitive bidding, and upholding rules for fairness and transparency. The report analyzes case studies from Colorado, New Mexico, Georgia, Minnesota, Indiana, Texas, California, Virginia, and North Carolina to illustrate the effectiveness of all-source RFPs in reducing costs and increasing renewable energy deployment.

Japan has provided over US$17.5 billion in public finance for 21 GW of coal power abroad since 2013, often justifying this by claiming to support "best available technologies" like ultra-supercritical plants. However, the document asserts that these plants are still too polluting to meet Paris Agreement goals and that Japan's withdrawal would not prevent the use of inferior technologies, as China and South Korea are also major funders. Furthermore, the briefing notes that Japanese-funded overseas projects often use inferior emission controls compared to domestic standards and that coal is increasingly an unsafe investment compared to cheaper solar and wind power.

South Korean state-owned financial institutions have invested US$5.6 billion in overseas coal-fired power plants since 2013, primarily in Vietnam and Indonesia. These investments face significant risks of becoming stranded assets as renewable energy costs drop and private lenders withdraw from coal. The document notes that new coal plants in Southeast Asia may operate for less than five years before becoming economically unviable. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted construction schedules and reduced electricity demand. These trends conflict with the South Korean Democratic Party's Green New Deal, which calls for phasing out public coal funding. Specific high-risk projects include the Jawa 9 and 10 plants in Indonesia, for which US$232.5 million in funding is under consideration.

South Korean public financial institutions face up to $6 billion in stranded asset risks due to investments in overseas coal power plants, particularly in Indonesia and Vietnam. This trend contradicts the South Korean government's 'Green New Deal' policy to phase out public funding for coal. The economic viability of coal is declining as solar and wind power costs drop, and the COVID-19 pandemic has further disrupted construction schedules and reduced electricity demand. Specific high-risk projects include the Jawa 9 and 10 plants in Indonesia and the Bung Ang 2 plant in Vietnam. Meanwhile, private financial institutions and several Southeast Asian nations are increasingly transitioning away from coal toward renewables.

China is the world's largest primary energy consumer and energy-related CO2 emitter. While the country is on track to meet most 2020 targets from its 13th Five-Year Plan, energy-related CO2 emissions continued to grow through 2018, surpassing 10 GtCO2. The report's 'Continuous Improvement Scenario' projects that primary energy consumption will peak in 2029 at 5,400 Mtce and CO2 emissions will peak in 2025 at 10,930 MtCO2, subsequently declining to 5,010 MtCO2 by 2050. This outlook assumes the maximum adoption of commercially available energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, leading to a power system where non-fossil sources generate 89% of electricity by 2050.

The 2020 Global Electricity Review reports a record 3% fall in global coal-fired electricity generation and a 2% drop in power sector CO2 emissions in 2019. While coal collapsed in the EU and US, generation rose in China, which now accounts for over 50% of global coal generation. Wind and solar generation grew by 15%, providing 8% of the world's electricity. However, the report argues that these declines are largely due to one-off factors and that current progress is insufficient to meet the IPCC's 1.5°C scenario, which would require coal generation to collapse by 11% annually until 2030.

The report argues that natural gas is not a viable 'bridge' fuel but rather a risk to climate stability and shareholder value. It highlights that new gas infrastructure is increasingly incompatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C goal and faces significant economic threats from the falling costs of renewables and storage. The document details how utilities face 'stranded asset' risks, regulatory pressure from state and city decarbonization mandates, and customer defection to community choice aggregations and corporate clean energy contracts. It suggests that 'steel for fuel' strategies—replacing fossil fuel generation with capital investment in renewables—offer a more sustainable financial model. The report concludes by urging investors to demand better disclosure on emissions and transition plans and to support policies like performance-based regulation and securitization to facilitate a just and rapid energy transition.

The report analyzes Angola's vulnerability to oil market volatility and its low human development outcomes. It argues that while GDP is projected to grow, absolute poverty will increase due to rapid population growth unless the government prioritizes human development. The authors evaluate five sectoral scenarios, concluding that investing in water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure provides the most significant economic and health benefits, while prioritizing education and reproductive healthcare for women is the fastest way to boost incomes and reduce maternal mortality.

The document opposes converting coal power plants in Réunion to biomass, citing higher direct CO2 emissions, carbon debt from forest harvesting, and risks to biodiversity and food security. It argues that importing massive quantities of biomass pellets—estimated at 900,000 tonnes per year for the Bois-Rouge and Le Gol plants—contradicts France's 2015 energy transition law regarding overseas energy autonomy and suggests prioritizing solar and wind energy instead.

The document argues that climate neutrality in Estonia by 2050 is feasible and likely profitable, provided the government implements early, ambitious investments and supportive regulatory frameworks. Key priorities include decarbonizing the energy supply by shifting away from oil shale, increasing energy efficiency in buildings, industry, and transport, and leveraging natural assets for carbon sequestration in the LULUCF sector. The transition is estimated to cost EUR 17.3 billion between 2021 and 2050, with 76% of funding expected from the private sector. To ensure a just transition, the report emphasizes the need for targeted support in the oil-shale dependent North-East region and workforce retraining.

The report finds that low-carbon energy transitions do not automatically improve social equity and can replicate existing structural inequalities if power asymmetries are not addressed. While some technologies like household solar provide benefits, others—particularly large-scale hydropower and biofuel plantations—often lead to land loss, displacement, and precarious employment. The authors argue that institutional frameworks and participatory processes, rather than the technology itself, determine whether a transition is just.

ClientEarth argues that Greece's proposed extension of its flexibility and interruptibility schemes is unjustified because a recent resource adequacy assessment indicates no supply concerns for 2020-2030. The organization contends that these schemes act as a disincentive for Greece to implement the 'Target Model' market reforms and may violate the recast Electricity Market Regulation (EMR), which positions such measures as a 'last resort'. ClientEarth highlights that the interruptibility scheme disproportionately impacts solar power producers through its levy formula and notes ongoing legal challenges against both schemes in the Greek Council of State.

China faces a significant challenge where 66.5% of its coal-fired power plants are located in water-scarce areas, driven by the West-to-East Electricity Transmission Project. To mitigate this, China is investing heavily in solar and wind energy, implementing air-cooling technologies that save nearly 80% of water withdrawal, and enforcing stricter water resource management quotas and caps for the coal sector.

The report argues that flexibility needs in India's electricity system are growing faster than energy demand, particularly under high renewable energy scenarios. It finds that a balanced portfolio of demand-side flexibility, powerplant upgrades, and energy storage can reduce total system costs by 5% to 8% and carbon emissions by 8% to 12% compared to a base case. The analysis highlights regional disparities, noting that states like Karnataka and Tamil Nadu face higher curtailment risks, and emphasizes the need for updated market designs, business models, and infrastructure to unlock these flexibility options.

The report argues that India's flexibility needs are growing faster than its energy demand, which could impede the deployment of renewable energy if not addressed. It identifies three primary flexibility resources: demand-side response (e.g., agricultural pumping, air conditioning, and industrial loads), improved thermal and hydroelectric powerplant operations, and energy storage (specifically lithium-ion batteries and pumped hydro). The analysis demonstrates that a 'balanced portfolio' combining these resources can reduce total system electricity costs by 5% to 8% and carbon emissions by 8% to 12% compared to a base case. Regional analysis shows that states like Karnataka and Tamil Nadu face more acute ramping and seasonal flexibility challenges due to high solar and wind penetration, while Uttar Pradesh could potentially export flexibility. The report concludes that achieving these goals requires significant reforms in market design, data collection, infrastructure, and business models.

Minnesota's electric cooperatives, serving 30% of the state's customers, remain tied to coal-fired power plants in North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming through Generation & Transmission (G&T) co-ops. While investor-owned utilities in Minnesota are phasing out coal, these co-ops face 'all-requirements' contracts and long-term fuel agreements that restrict their ability to adopt renewables. Many of these out-of-state plants operate uneconomically, costing customers over $93 million between 2015 and 2017.

The report examines several green energy initiatives across Africa, highlighting a recurring failure to conduct meaningful public consultation and respect land rights. Through case studies on green hydrogen in South Africa and Namibia, nuclear and geothermal power in Kenya, and wind energy in Kenya, the document demonstrates how 'green' labels are often used to bypass human rights standards. It concludes with recommendations for international financiers and states to mandate human rights targets and prioritize the rights of Indigenous peoples and marginalized communities in the Just Energy Transition.

The report details a policy dialogue workshop in Tallinn, Estonia, aimed at designing pathways toward a sustainable bioeconomy in the Baltic Sea region. Participants identified energy as the primary driving sector and emphasized the need for high-value-added products, localized value chains, and a shift in consumer thinking. Five key enabling factors were identified: clear policy goals (including carbon taxes and national strategies), support for research and innovation through multi-helix interaction models, public procurement and education to drive demand, cross-sector cooperation to manage biomass competition, and the integration of circularity to preserve biodiversity. The document also reflects on the pilot methodology, noting that the pre-selected global sustainability scenario was too general and that future workshops should group participants by economic sector rather than organization type.