Search Climate Insights Directory

The document contends that global and European food insecurity is a problem of distribution, access, and utilization rather than production. It highlights that the EU is a net exporter of agri-food products and that a significant portion of its cereal production is used for animal feed and biofuels rather than human consumption. The text argues that industrial agricultural practices drive the climate and biodiversity crises, which in turn threaten food yields through pollinator loss and extreme weather. It advocates for a transition to agro-ecological practices and the adoption of the EU Nature Restoration Law with ambitious, enforceable targets to capture carbon and protect ecosystem services.

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 policy brief advocates for the development of floating offshore wind on the U.S. West Coast to meet net-zero emissions goals, noting that it can provide reliable power during peak early evening demand and reduce land-use conflicts. It highlights the economic potential for job creation and port revitalization, specifically citing the Port of Humboldt Bay. The authors call for long-term federal tax credits, port infrastructure investment, proactive transmission planning, and accelerated siting to overcome current lacks in ambition compared to the East Coast.

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 briefing reports that 2030 climate target updates have stalled since COP26, leaving the world on track for 2.4°C of warming based on current targets and 2.7°C based on current policies. Despite the Glasgow Climate Pact's request for governments to strengthen their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by the end of 2022, no major emitter has updated its target. The report highlights a significant emissions gap, noting that global emissions in 2030 would be twice as high as the 1.5°C limit allows without increased action. It suggests four pathways for governments to update targets: full NDC updates, expanding NDC coverage (specifically for China regarding non-CO2 gases), participating in new sectoral initiatives, or implementing policies to overachieve existing targets.

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 report argues that an accelerated clean energy transition is economically beneficial, reducing household energy bills, creating jobs, and increasing GDP growth compared to business-as-usual scenarios. It outlines specific policy levers—such as decarbonizing power systems by 2035/2040 and phasing out coal—that can drive these gains. Modelling shows significant per capita energy savings in G7 nations and substantial job creation in developing economies like India and Indonesia.

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 Federal Court of Germany ruled that parts of the Federal Climate Protection Act (KSG) were incompatible with fundamental rights because they lacked provisions for updating greenhouse gas emission reduction targets from 2031 onwards. While the court found that the government breached obligations by omitting post-2030 targets, it declined to compel a limit of 1.5°C over 2°C, citing IPCC uncertainty and legislative discretion. The court also affirmed that national climate action is required regardless of whether such action alone can stop global climate change, and it granted standing to complainants from Nepal and Bangladesh, though it did not establish a specific duty of protection for people abroad under the Basic Law.

The executive summary outlines a strategy for Canada to reach carbon neutrality by shifting from fossil fuels to clean electricity. It emphasizes the need for a massive expansion of electricity production capacity, the acceleration of wind and solar deployment, and the implementation of 'electro-federalism'—a coordinated policy approach across all levels of government to manage the transition and ensure equity.

Australia has become a global leader in decarbonizing high-end commercial buildings through 'ambition loops'—positive feedback cycles where government regulation, industry collaboration, and market demand reinforce each other. Early leadership from the Victoria state government and the Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council (ASBEC) helped overcome initial knowledge gaps and lack of demand. The implementation of mandatory efficiency codes and transparency tools, such as the Commercial Building Disclosure Program and the National Australian Built Environment Rating System (NABERS), created a competitive environment where sustainable buildings attract more corporate tenants and investors. This model has since influenced residential and construction sectors in Australia and exported rating systems to New Zealand and the UK.

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 MENA region is well-positioned to produce zero-carbon fuels due to its abundant solar, wind, and hydrocarbon resources, as well as existing industrial infrastructure. While 'green' hydrogen (from renewables) and 'blue' hydrogen (from natural gas with carbon capture and storage) are both viable, the report argues that hydrocarbon-derived fuels could provide a lower-cost catalytic role in scaling the market. However, significant barriers exist, including a lack of meaningful demand beyond industrial users, the absence of carbon pricing or regulatory requirements to reduce emissions, and a lack of common certification schemes for lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. The report recommends regional coordination, the development of fuel-neutral procurement policies, and the establishment of comprehensive regulatory frameworks for carbon management to attract investment and ensure environmental integrity.

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.