Search Climate Insights Directory

The European steel and cement sectors face substantial surplus production capacity and limited reinvestment, hindering the adoption of low-carbon technologies. While energy efficiency and fuel-switching have provided some gains, breakthrough process technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS) require significant public funding and a credible, long-term carbon price signal for both producers and consumers to be viable. The report argues that a comprehensive policy package—combining the EU ETS, innovation funding, and updated building standards—is essential to transition these capital-intensive industries toward sustainable, high-value production.

Carbon Market Watch argues that the EU ETS review proposal prioritizes industrial interests over climate goals by earmarking at least €160 billion in free pollution permits after 2020. While the proposal increases the linear reduction factor to 2.2% to meet 2030 targets, the organization contends this is offset by the release of surplus allowances and the continuation of free allocations to prevent hypothetical carbon leakage.

The report argues that a "carbon market only" approach is insufficient for the cost-effective decarbonisation of the European power sector. While the EU ETS is an effective tool for driving fuel switching in the residual thermal generation mix, it cannot alone drive necessary investments in low-carbon technologies due to high capital costs, revenue risks, and the 'merit order effect'. The authors recommend a policy mix where the EU ETS is complemented by tailored national investment supports—such as feed-in tariffs or contracts for difference—to reduce the cost of capital. To ensure coherence, the report proposes an ex-ante cap adjustment process for the ETS based on Member State National Energy and Climate Plans and the development of long-term decarbonisation strategies back-casted from 2050.

The author discusses the deep distrust immigrant families in Norway have toward the Child Welfare Service (Barnevernet), noting that this fear often outweighs the understanding that some children need protection. This crisis of confidence has evolved into a foreign policy issue, with countries like Lithuania, Poland, and India becoming involved. The author argues that the state's communication measures have been insufficient and that trust in such institutions is essential for a democratic society and the successful integration of immigrants.

As of 31 March 2015, the Green Climate Fund Trust Fund had received total contributions of USDeq. 171.20 million, with USDeq. 128.00 million deposited by 23 contributors. The GCF Board approved funding totaling USD 65.11 million for administrative budgets and readiness activities, while the interim trustee transferred USD 19.62 million. Total funds available to support GCF Board funding decisions were USD 63,147,206.

The document analyzes the EU's Effort Sharing Decision (ESD), which sets emission targets for non-ETS sectors (transport, buildings, agriculture, and waste). It argues that the 2013-2020 period was characterized by weak targets and overgenerous flexibilities, leading to projected overachievement without new mitigation actions. For the 2021-2030 period, the EU aims for a 30% reduction compared to 2005. The brief warns that certain proposed flexibilities—specifically the use of EU ETS allowances and forestry offsets—could increase overall EU emissions by up to 28% by 2030. It recommends focusing on early action, implementing EU-wide mitigation policies, introducing auctioning based on the polluter-pays principle, and restricting borrowing to avoid delaying climate action.

The author contends that Germany's historical preference for non-military foreign policy and economic cooperation is no longer viable in a globalised world. Highlighting the paralysis of the UN Security Council and the rise of authoritarianism, the text calls for a more active European foreign policy. It specifically emphasizes the need for the EU to support Ukraine against Russian neo-imperialism and to maintain a value-based partnership with the United States to avoid security vacuums.

The report examines return migration as a complex spectrum of agency and coercion, challenging the 'myth of return' and the binary of forced versus voluntary migration. It identifies ten key findings, highlighting that return intentions are shaped by competing attachments to multiple societies and that reintegration can be as challenging as initial integration due to social expectations, corruption, and security risks. The research emphasizes the critical role of short-term return visits in informing decisions and maintaining transnational ties, while noting that secure legal status in a destination country often paradoxically facilitates the possibility of return by providing a safety net.

The evaluation finds that Joint Implementation (JI) likely increased global GHG emissions by approximately 600 million tCO2e because many projects lacked additionality and were hosted by countries with significant allowance surpluses. The report highlights systemic failures in auditing, particularly under Track 1, and notes that 80% of issued ERUs came from project types with low or questionable environmental integrity. It recommends international oversight, standardized methodologies, and the prohibition of retroactive crediting for future mechanisms.

The document asserts that 90 entities, including 50 investor-owned companies, are responsible for 63% of industrial CO2 and methane emissions since 1751. It argues that these companies ignored scientific warnings as early as 1988 and actively worked to discredit climate science. The author calls for these producers to stop disinformation, disclose financial risks, support the 2°C warming target, and pay for climate-related damages.

The document criticizes the Polish government's reliance on fossil fuels and its lack of a transition strategy, warning that a delayed response will lead to economic 'shock therapy'. It proposes a tripartite commission comprising environmentalists, labor unions, and green businesses to overcome political gridlock and ensure a 'just transition' that protects workers' rights while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The document criticizes the Polish government's reliance on coal and its lack of a transition plan, warning that a sudden forced reduction in greenhouse gas emissions could lead to severe economic shock. It proposes a strategic alliance between ecologists, trade unions, and green businesses to overcome the current political impasse and ensure a 'just transition' that protects workers' rights while reducing emissions.

The report argues that Anglo American and other dirty energy corporations have 'captured' climate policy-making, particularly within the UNFCCC, to protect their business models. It highlights the severe social and environmental damage caused by the El Cerrejón coal mine in Colombia, including water scarcity and the displacement of indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. The document details Anglo American's use of a 'web of influence'—including memberships in groups like the ICC, WBCSD, and EUROMINES—to lobby for market-based mechanisms such as carbon trading and carbon capture and storage (CCS), which the authors term 'false solutions'. It concludes by calling for the removal of corporate privileged access to climate negotiations, the end of public subsidies for dirty energy, and increased lobby transparency.

The report analyzes the EU's 2030 climate deal, which includes a binding 40% domestic greenhouse gas reduction target, a 27% renewable energy target, and a 27% energy efficiency target. Carbon Market Watch argues that these targets fall short of the 55% reduction required for a fair contribution to global climate goals. The analysis highlights significant risks to the 40% target, specifically the oversupply of EU ETS allowances (estimated at 2.6-4.5 billion by 2020) and the use of ETS allowances to meet non-ETS sector targets. It also criticizes the continuation of free emission allowances for industry and the provision of financial support to the power sectors of low-income Member States, which may prolong the use of coal.

Carbon Market Watch warns that the proposed 40% greenhouse gas emission reduction target for 2030 is insufficient and threatened by 'hot air' loopholes. Specifically, the carry-over of surplus allowances from the EU ETS and Effort Sharing Decision could reduce actual emissions cuts to as low as 26%. The author advocates for the retention of nationally binding renewable and energy efficiency targets to drive innovation and decarbonisation.

The report identifies a portfolio of low-carbon opportunities for the European steel sector, ranging from energy efficiency and fuel shifting to breakthrough technologies like Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and increased recycling. It argues that current EU ETS mechanisms, particularly free allocation based on historic volumes, fail to provide sufficient incentives for deep decarbonisation and high-value product innovation. The authors recommend a structural reform of leakage protection, specifically proposing a combination of output-based allocation and the inclusion of consumption in the EU ETS to create a credible business case for breakthrough technologies and material efficiency. The report also emphasizes the need for sustained public funding for process innovation to overcome the 'valley of death' in technology scaling and suggests strengthening links between steel producers and downstream consumers, particularly in the automotive and construction sectors, to drive demand for lightweight, high-strength steels.

EU coal emissions rose 6% from 2010 to 2013, contributing to 18% of total EU CO2 emissions. This increase was driven by fuel-switching from gas to coal in Germany, the UK, and Poland, which together account for 66% of coal-based emissions. While renewables and falling demand reduced overall fossil generation by 4.3% per year, the low carbon price under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) failed to prevent coal's resurgence. The report warns that the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) may not force expected closures because of cheaper compliance technologies and the introduction of capacity markets, particularly in the UK and Poland, which risk locking in high-carbon infrastructure into the 2030s. Modelling suggests that if coal remains cheaper than gas, emissions will fall only 3% by 2016, though the potential for fuel-switching will increase by 2020. Sandbag recommends urgent ETS reform, mandatory carbon intensity reporting, and targeted CCS funding.

The report by Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) details over 100 incidents of violence against environmental defenders across 27 countries. It identifies a systemic pattern of criminalization, physical attacks, and state repression linked to large-scale extractivist projects. The document advocates for legally binding international norms for transnational corporations and the recognition of environmental defense as a fundamental human right.

The document critiques the predominantly national level of First World War memorialization, arguing that such approaches often reproduce the nationalistic discourse that led to the conflict. The author proposes a new culture of remembrance under the auspices of the European Parliament that emphasizes the shared experience of futility and horror over national honor. By disclosing diverse narratives and historic grievances, the author suggests that Europe can create the mutual trust necessary to overcome current political and economic stalemates and strengthen the European Union's democratic legitimacy.

The report assesses the 2009-2014 European Parliament term from a Green perspective, highlighting victories in energy efficiency, data protection, and fisheries, while critiquing the influence of fossil fuel and agro-industrial lobbies. It argues for a more democratic, social, and ecologically sustainable European Union to counter neoliberal austerity and conservative pushback.