Search Climate Insights Directory

Between September 1 and December 18, 2025, 22,158 lobbyist entries were recorded at the European Parliament, with private interests accounting for 59% of visits. The report highlights a pervasive presence of American lobbyists (95% presence rate) and fossil fuel representatives (87.5% presence rate), who utilized direct access and professional consultancies to influence the Omnibus I law. A case study on ExxonMobil reveals the company spent between €1.3 million and €1.7 million on consultancies alone in 2025 to target climate legislation. The analysis concludes that this lobbying effort, supported by a right-wing/far-right parliamentary majority, successfully secured the removal of climate transition plans from the legislation.

Between September 1 and December 18, 2025, the European Parliament recorded 22,158 lobbyist entries, with private interests accounting for 59% of these visits. The report highlights a disproportionate presence of US-based lobbyists and fossil fuel interests, who were present 87.5% of the time during the studied period. This influence was particularly concentrated around the negotiation of the Omnibus I law, which modified the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). The analysis reveals that fossil fuel lobbyists often entered the Parliament without declared appointments to engage in informal interactions. A case study of ExxonMobil demonstrates a complex lobbying chain involving direct visits, professional consultancies, and trade associations, totaling over 650 entries in four months to push for the removal of climate transition plans.

The report highlights that 'next generation geothermal' technologies, such as Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS), have expanded the geographic viability of geothermal power beyond volcanic regions. In the EU, approximately 43 GW of capacity could be developed at costs below 100 €/MWh, potentially generating 301 TWh of electricity annually. While Europe has a strong historical foundation in geothermal energy, the report warns that the EU risks losing its leadership to the US and Canada due to slow permitting and a lack of coordinated policy frameworks. It also notes geothermal's potential to meet the rising energy demands of AI data centres and its ability to provide firm, low-carbon power and mineral recovery, such as lithium.

The report argues that European security of supply planning and clean procurement policies have been uncoordinated, often resulting in capacity mechanisms that favor fossil fuels and contracts that distort short-term market signals. It proposes a shift toward 'market-aligned' contracting—such as index REC structures—and co-optimized multi-product markets that separately value energy, capacity, and clean attributes to attract clean investment without sacrificing operational efficiency.

The document translates the ICJ's 2025 Advisory Opinion on climate change into practical legal tools for climate litigation. It details State obligations under international treaties (UNFCCC, Paris Agreement) and customary law, emphasizing a 'rigorous' due diligence standard to limit global warming to 1.5°C. The guide covers specific litigation areas including government framework cases, adaptation, reparations, the right to a healthy environment, corporate conduct, climate finance, speculative interventions (like geoengineering), and regulatory backsliding, providing key quotes and illustrative case examples for each.

The document analyzes the implications of the ICJ's advisory opinion on States' obligations to prevent environmental harm, specifically focusing on the cessation of fossil fuel subsidies and the regulation of private finance. It argues that States may commit internationally wrongful acts by continuing to fund fossil fuel production or failing to regulate private financiers. Additionally, it outlines binding obligations for developed States to provide financial assistance to developing countries for climate adaptation and mitigation under the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement. The briefing concludes by categorizing various types of climate litigation—including cases against public agencies, central banks, and private financial institutions—where these legal findings are applicable.

The document analyzes how the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion (AO) establishes a 'stringent due diligence' standard for States to prevent significant harm to the climate system. It argues that regulatory rollbacks, such as easing emission standards or removing Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) requirements, may constitute internationally wrongful acts. The note provides specific legal excerpts from the AO and applies them to various categories of litigation, including challenges to diluted mitigation standards, weakened land-use protections, and procedural rollbacks. A detailed annex examines recent regulatory shifts in India—including thermal power emission norms, forest governance changes under the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act 2023, and EIA exemptions—as examples of conduct that may breach the ICJ's established standards.

The document distills the International Court of Justice (ICJ) 2025 advisory opinion to assist practitioners in seeking climate-related remedies. It establishes that State responsibility for climate harm is governed by customary international law and can trigger a full range of legal consequences, including cessation, non-repetition, and reparation (restitution, compensation, and satisfaction). The note clarifies that a plurality of contributors does not exempt individual States from responsibility and that scientific evidence allows for the determination of each State's total contribution to global emissions. It further outlines how these findings apply to human rights cases, corporate accountability litigation, and inter-State proceedings.

The document analyzes the legal implications of the ICJ's 2025 advisory opinion for 'government framework cases,' which target emissions reduction targets and regulatory frameworks. It details how the ICJ clarified that 1.5°C is the primary temperature goal of the Paris Agreement and established a 'stringent' due diligence standard for States in preparing and implementing Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The guide highlights that NDCs must reflect a State's 'highest possible ambition' and be capable of making an adequate contribution to the 1.5°C goal. It also emphasizes the application of customary international law regarding the duty to prevent significant transboundary harm and the duty to cooperate, regardless of treaty membership. Furthermore, the document connects climate action to human rights obligations and intergenerational equity, providing a legal basis for courts to order remedies such as the adoption of consistent NDCs or full reparation.

The report details how industrial actors employ strategies such as suppressing harmful data, funding biased research, and using front groups to avoid regulation of toxic chemicals. It provides case studies on PFAS, Bisphenol A (BPA), benzene, and neonicotinoids to illustrate these patterns of disinformation. The document concludes that to protect public health and the environment, companies producing hazardous substances should be prohibited from influencing the formulation of the policies that regulate them.

The document outlines a 'playbook' of industry tactics used to block chemical regulations, including the suppression of harmful data, the funding of biased research, and the use of front groups. It provides detailed case studies on PFAS, Bisphenol A (BPA), benzene, and pesticides to illustrate these patterns. The authors argue that because of this history of manipulation, chemical manufacturers and their trade associations should be prohibited from participating in the regulatory processes that govern their products, similar to the WHO's approach to the tobacco industry.

The document outlines a 'playbook' of corporate strategies used to avoid regulation of hazardous substances, including withholding data, undermining independent science, and using front groups. It provides case studies on PFAS, Bisphenol A (BPA), benzene, and neonicotinoids to illustrate these tactics and recommends banning industry participation in regulatory policymaking to protect human health and the environment.

The document translates the ICJ's 2025 advisory opinion into practical tools for climate litigation, focusing on government framework cases, adaptation, remedies, the right to a healthy environment, corporate conduct, climate finance, speculative interventions, and regulatory rollbacks.

In 2025, Türkiye became Europe's fourth-largest market for new battery electric vehicles (BEVs), with sales reaching approximately 190,000 units. This growth saw the BEV share of new car sales rise to 17%, matching the European Union average for the first time. Despite this momentum, BEVs represent only 2.1% of all registered cars in Türkiye, and gasoline consumption increased by 16% in the first 11 months of 2025. The report highlights that while domestic production and tax-compatible models drove growth, high overall tax burdens and exchange rate fluctuations remain challenges to further reducing energy imports.

In 2025, the EU power sector reached a tipping point as wind and solar generated 30.1% of electricity, surpassing all fossil fuel sources at 29.0%. Solar generation hit a record 369 TWh, growing by 20.1% over 2024, while coal fell to a historic low of 9.2% of the mix. Despite a slight increase in gas power generation and associated import costs, renewables provided nearly half of the EU's electricity (47.7%), with solar output helping to offset low wind and hydro production caused by unusual weather in early 2025.

The document examines the systemic failure to apply the Polluter-Pays Principle (PPP) to PFAS pollution, noting that clean-up costs in Europe could exceed €100 billion annually. It proposes a framework where the PPP covers legacy, present, and future pollution—regardless of legality—and targets both producers and users. The authors advocate for a combination of taxes, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, and risk-pooling funds to prevent public funds from bearing the cost of remediation, while emphasizing that the PPP must be paired with a total phase-out of PFAS.

The report examines how the insurance and reinsurance sectors are responding to intensifying climate disruptions in global supply chains. It identifies critical structural, market, and modelling limits that undermine the industry's ability to absorb systemic risk, noting a trend toward 'un-insurability' in high-risk regions. The author argues that without a shift from simple risk transfer to a stewardship model integrated with long-term adaptation and public-private coordination, the sector may amplify rather than stabilize economic volatility.

In 2025, electric vehicles (EVs) accounted for over a quarter of global new car sales, driven by a significant shift in emerging markets. While legacy auto markets in the US and Canada have seen a rollback of incentives, countries in Southeast Asia and Latin America are 'leapfrogging' advanced economies. Viet Nam and Singapore have reached EV sales shares exceeding 40%, surpassing the UK and EU. China continues to dominate as the largest market, with its exports increasingly targeting non-OECD markets such as Brazil, Mexico, the UAE, and Indonesia. The report highlights that EVs significantly reduce fossil fuel demand, with battery electric vehicles in Brazil delivering an estimated 90% reduction compared to internal combustion engine vehicles.

The research paper examines how the 1989 Belgium-Luxembourg (BLEU)–USSR bilateral investment treaty (BIT) is being used as a legal threat to prevent Belgium from supporting an EU plan to back a EUR 140 billion Ukraine loan with immobilized Russian Central Bank assets. It highlights a broader trend of 'regulatory chill' where Russian entities use investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) claims to challenge sanctions. The author argues for the modernization of investment treaties and the implementation of domestic legal blocks to prevent the enforcement of arbitration awards that contradict international sanctions regimes.

The report finds that the EU is not on track to meet its 2030 interconnection targets, with 80% of the power system expected to miss the goal. To reach an optimal grid by 2040, Europe needs to nearly double its interconnection capacity, adding 151 GW. This expansion requires an estimated €150 billion in investment, leaving a €30 billion public funding gap in the proposed 2028-2034 Connecting Europe Facility for Energy (CEF-E) budget.