Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes the progress of 39 governments and public finance institutions that signed the Glasgow Statement to end international public finance for fossil fuels. It finds that while USD 28 billion per year could be redirected toward a clean energy transition, most signatories have not yet published aligned policies. The document highlights best practices from countries like Denmark and the UK, and examines the impact on low- and middle-income countries through case studies on Ethiopia and Sri Lanka.

The report demonstrates that Europe can achieve a 94-96% clean power system by 2035 at no extra cost compared to stated policies, provided wind and solar deployment quadruples. This transition would enable wider electrification, potentially halving fossil fuel consumption by 2030 and saving between €530 billion and €1 trillion by 2035. Key requirements include expanding interconnection, deploying electrolysers for green hydrogen, and phasing out coal by 2030 and unabated baseload gas after 2025.

The Clean Air Task Force asserts that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is essential for decarbonising foundational industries like cement, iron, steel, and chemicals, which account for approximately one-fifth of total emissions. While some national initiatives exist in the UK, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, and Norway, the author argues that a centralized EU strategy is needed to resolve cross-border transport issues, close a projected €10 billion funding gap, and address a storage capacity deficit where available space by 2030 may only meet half of the captured CO2 volume. The proposed strategy would include setting milestone targets, developing strategically placed storage sites, and creating a regulatory platform for CO2 transport infrastructure.

European governments are significantly increasing renewable energy targets and slashing planned fossil fuel electricity generation to reduce geopolitical dependence on Russian energy. Analysis shows that EU countries' planned 2030 renewable electricity share has risen from 55% to 63%, while planned fossil fuel generation has dropped by 31%. Major importers of Russian fuels, including Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands, are leading these efforts through ambitious wind and solar expansions. The report also highlights the REPowerEU framework's role in coordinating these efforts and the need for further decarbonization in the heating, industry, and transport sectors.

The report outlines how Ember updated its 2020 NECP assessment by incorporating policy changes announced between 2020 and 2022, including coal phase-outs and clean power commitments. It details the transformation of capacity targets into generation figures, the assumption that renewables replace fossil fuels (with specific exceptions for nuclear in Hungary), and the treatment of overproduction in countries like Denmark and France. The analysis identifies 19 governments that updated their renewables expansion or fossil fuel phase-out ambitions beyond their original National Energy and Climate Plans.

The ASEAN+3 sustainable debt market reached USD 449 billion by Q3 2021, driven largely by the People's Republic of China, Japan, and Hong Kong, China. While green bonds remain dominant, the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the issuance of social and sustainability-labeled instruments. Local currency (LCY) issuance represents 64% of the region's total sustainable debt, though this is unevenly distributed; Thailand has the highest LCY share at 98.5%, while Viet Nam and Indonesia rely heavily on foreign currencies. The report identifies barriers such as lack of market awareness, high transaction costs for small deals, and a shortage of bankable green projects. It recommends increasing sovereign GSS bond issuance, expanding the investor base through ETFs and indices, and establishing centralized sustainable finance platforms to improve project visibility.

The 2021 progress assessment of the Blue Manifesto reveals that most targets are not being met, with only one of eight 2021 milestones on track for full completion. The report highlights significant gaps in the implementation of Maritime Spatial Plans, the failure to eliminate bycatch of sensitive species, and a general lack of ambition in the Council of Ministers regarding fisheries control. While some progress is noted in the EU's Emissions Trading System and international biodiversity negotiations, the overall outcome for 2020 was revised to be more negative, indicating that current EU efforts are insufficient to meet the ambitions of the EU Green Deal and Biodiversity Strategy 2030.

The report argues that military decarbonization is essential for both climate mitigation and operational effectiveness, as fossil fuel dependency creates strategic vulnerabilities. It highlights the lack of a standardized emission measurement methodology, noting that while 'standard operations' (buildings and administration) are relatively easy to green, 'non-standard operations' (heavy weaponry and combat mobility) present significant technological hurdles. The document evaluates the current efforts of NATO and the EU, suggesting that NATO can lead through standardization and normative influence, while the EU can leverage its legislative power and financial instruments like the European Defence Fund. It concludes with recommendations for EU-NATO coordination to avoid duplication and accelerate the transition to clean military power.

The report identifies a critical gap between current energy policies and the requirements for limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Based on 26 'feasible' IPCC pathways that limit reliance on unproven carbon capture and removal technologies, the authors argue that no new oil and gas fields should be developed and that global production must drop by 30% by 2030. Simultaneously, wind and solar capacity additions must double current forecasts, requiring an annual investment of over USD 830 billion by 2030. The report highlights a USD 450 billion annual investment gap and calls for the redirection of capital away from fossil fuels, noting that current oil and gas industry spending on undeveloped fields is inconsistent with climate goals.

The report analyzes the international public finance (IPF) trends of high-income signatories of the Glasgow Statement, evaluating their fossil fuel exclusion policies and clean energy strategies. It finds that while some robust practices exist, many signatories lack transparent policies, particularly regarding gas exclusions and concrete clean energy targets. The document highlights the potential to shift USD 28 billion annually from fossil fuels to clean energy and uses case studies from Ethiopia and Sri Lanka to demonstrate how this shift can prevent fossil fuel lock-in and support just transitions in low- and middle-income countries.

The report argues that governments are reacting to the energy crisis by prioritizing short-term fossil fuel security over long-term decarbonization, risking a 'gold rush' for new gas infrastructure and domestic production. While some progress in renewables and green hydrogen is noted, the authors highlight a prevalence of 'bad practices' such as fossil fuel subsidies, tax cuts for petrol, and the expansion of LNG facilities. The document provides a framework of 'do's and don'ts', urging governments to instead focus on energy efficiency, electrification, behavioral changes, and the reinvestment of fossil fuel windfall profits into clean energy to avoid stranded assets and irreversible warming.

The report examines the economic opportunities of transitioning to net-zero emissions by 2050 across several major economies. It argues that public investment can drive innovation and growth through signalling, crowding-in private capital, and reducing unit costs. While fossil fuel-exporting nations like the US, Canada, and Indonesia may face long-term GDP losses as global demand for hydrocarbons falls, the report finds that most subject economies—including the EU, UK, India, Japan, and South Africa—experience net gains in GDP and employment. The transition is predicted to significantly reduce household expenditure on fossil fuels, improve public health by reducing pollution, and enhance energy security, particularly for the EU in the context of reducing dependence on Russian gas.

The document analyzes India's offshore wind potential, primarily off the coasts of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, noting that while the country has a target of 30 GW by 2030, no projects are currently operational. It identifies critical barriers including high capital costs, lack of specialized port infrastructure, and regulatory uncertainties. By comparing India to existing markets like the UK and Denmark and emerging markets like Taiwan and South Korea, the paper recommends updating the National Offshore Wind Energy Policy 2015, implementing competitive procurement mechanisms such as Contracts for Difference, and developing a government-led 'plug-and-play' power evacuation model to reduce investor risk. It also emphasizes the need for detailed Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and the integration of offshore wind with green hydrogen or hybrid RTC (round-the-clock) renewable projects to enhance economic viability.

The document examines the critical role of forests in climate regulation and biodiversity, noting that 420 million hectares have been lost since 1990. It analyzes the shift from failed attempts at a global forests convention to a polycentric governance system involving the UN Forum on Forests, REDD, and private sector deforestation commitments. The brief highlights the risks of carbon offsets and monoculture plantations, arguing that successful forest protection requires holistic valuation, strong political will, and the alignment of financial incentives.

The report argues that while Europe has significant theoretical CO2 storage capacity, actual deployment is hindered by a funding gap, regulatory barriers to cross-border transport, and a lack of coordinated infrastructure. It recommends shifting from project-based funding to system-based approaches, implementing carbon contracts for difference (CCfDs), and establishing a market for low-carbon products. The authors call for a formal EU strategy to set milestone targets and coordinate the development of large-scale, open-access storage sites beyond the North Sea.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally exhibit low transparency and ambition regarding plastic reduction, with an overall average score of 13.1%. Most retailers rely on voluntary commitments and recyclability rather than waste prevention and reuse systems. While some UK retailers show higher performance, there is significant inconsistency in policies across international retail groups, and some companies are accused of greenwashing through ineffective recycling schemes that result in waste being exported and dumped in third countries like Turkey.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally exhibit low transparency and ambition regarding plastic reduction, often relying on voluntary commitments and recycling-focused strategies rather than systemic reuse. An analysis of 74 retailers reveals an average total score of only 13.1%, with significant disparities in performance between different countries where the same retail chains operate. The document highlights tactics used by retailers to delay legislative progress, such as lobbying against deposit return systems (DRS), and criticizes 'greenwashing' practices, including the mislabeling of single-use plastics as reusable.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally perform poorly in addressing the plastic crisis, with an average score of 13.1% across transparency, commitments, and policy support. While some UK and Irish retailers score higher, most companies lack basic data on their plastic footprints and prioritize recyclability over waste prevention. The analysis highlights a tendency toward 'greenwashing,' where retailers promote voluntary pledges or flawed collection schemes instead of systemic changes or supporting binding legislation.

The report reveals a significant gap between the public communications of European retailers and their actual performance in reducing plastic pollution, with a global average score of only 13.1% across transparency, commitments, and policy support. While some retailers like Aldi in the UK and Ireland score higher, the majority fail to provide basic data on their plastic footprints or support mandatory reuse targets. The analysis highlights a systemic preference for voluntary commitments and recyclability over waste prevention and reuse, while warning against 'greenwashing' practices such as exporting flexible plastics to third countries like Turkey where they may be illegally burned.

The report finds that European supermarkets generally perform poorly in addressing the plastic crisis, with an average score of 13.1% across transparency, commitments, and policy support. While some UK and Irish chains score higher, most companies lack basic data on their plastic footprints and fail to implement systemic changes like reusable packaging. The analysis highlights a preference for voluntary commitments over binding regulations and warns against greenwashing practices, such as exporting flexible plastics to third countries like Turkey.