Search Climate Insights Directory

Reclaim Finance has issued an open letter to Crédit Agricole's CEO, Philippe Brassac, demanding the bank stop financing fossil fuel companies active in Russia. The organization calls for the blacklisting of companies on the Urgewald Global Coal Exit List and Global Oil and Gas Exit List, specifically mentioning Gazprom. The letter further requests the suspension of support for companies like TotalEnergies, Uniper/Fortum, and Wintershall DEA until they exit Russian operations, arguing that fossil fuel dependence drives both climate change and international conflict.

Reclaim Finance urges Crédit Agricole to stop providing financial services to coal, oil, and gas companies active in Russia, specifically citing the bank's role as a main banker for Gazprom and its support for TotalEnergies. The organization argues that fossil fuel dependence fuels both international conflict and climate change, calling for a shift toward renewables and energy savings to achieve carbon neutrality.

Reclaim Finance calls on Crédit Agricole to stop financing Russian coal, oil, and gas companies, specifically highlighting the bank's role as a main banker for Gazprom. The letter demands divestment from a provided blacklist of Russian energy firms and the suspension of support for non-Russian companies still active in Russia, such as TotalEnergies, until they withdraw.

Reclaim Finance calls on Groupe Crédit Agricole to stop financing Russian coal, oil, and gas companies and to divest from them via Amundi. The organization specifically highlights Crédit Agricole's role as a major financier of Gazprom and its significant investment in TotalEnergies, demanding that support for the latter and other non-Russian firms like Fortum/Uniper and Wintershall DEA be suspended until they exit Russian operations.

The We Mean Business Coalition issued a statement of solidarity with the people of Ukraine following unprovoked aggression. The coalition supports the international community's use of political, diplomatic, and economic measures to end the conflict and emphasizes that collaborative leadership across borders is essential for solving global challenges, including the climate crisis.

The author urges journalists to ensure climate change remains a central part of the coverage for President Joe Biden's first State of the Union address. While acknowledging Biden's achievements—such as rejoining the Paris Agreement and signing a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill—the text highlights contradictions, including the continued approval of oil and gas permits and the failure of the Build Back Better bill. The author contends that the press should challenge overly optimistic narratives and hold both the administration and political obstructionists accountable, noting that the West's reliance on fossil fuels complicates the response to the crisis in Ukraine.

The briefing argues that a comprehensive global methane agreement is necessary to achieve a 40-45% reduction in emissions by 2030 to maintain the 1.5°C warming target. It proposes three pillars of action: an updated monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) framework utilizing satellite technology; national methane action plans targeting the energy, agriculture, and waste sectors; and a system of technical and financial assistance for developing countries. The authors highlight that many mitigation measures, particularly in the energy sector, are low-cost or can be implemented at no net cost.

The report argues that increasing fossil fuel production is an ineffective short-term solution for energy security due to the global nature of oil and gas markets. Instead, it uses the U.S. Energy Policy Simulator (EPS) to demonstrate that clean energy incentives—such as EV tax credits and building electrification—would significantly reduce U.S. fossil fuel demand. In a 'Moderate Scenario', these policies would reduce annual oil consumption by over 180 million barrels by 2030, more than offsetting 2021 Russian oil imports, and reduce natural gas consumption by 4.7 trillion cubic feet, roughly 85% of the EU's 2021 Russian gas imports. The report also estimates GHG emission reductions of 740 to 1,230 million metric tonnes by 2030.

The report examines the drivers of recent coups in West Africa and the need for the AU to strengthen normative frameworks against unconstitutional changes of government. It assesses the shift in EU financing from the Africa Peace Facility (APF) to the European Peace Facility (EPF), warning that this may increase European militarism and reduce AU leadership in peace operations. Additionally, it evaluates the transition from AMISOM to ATMIS in Somalia and the potential for joint AU-UN mediation to resolve the political stalemate in Sudan.

The document examines Russia's soft-power strategy in Africa, noting that while Russia is primarily associated with hard power, it leverages Soviet-era legacies, education, and anti-Western narratives to attract African elites and populations. It identifies key strengths in the promotion of multipolarity and traditional values, while highlighting limitations such as insufficient financial resources and the mixed results of vaccine diplomacy.

The ClimVis Europe pilot project identifies a significant gap between the production of complex climate data and its usability for non-expert decision-makers and educators in Europe. Through surveys and focus groups across six countries, the project found that existing tools often exclude users due to a lack of native-language options—particularly in Eastern Europe and Russia—and a failure to link real-time extreme weather events with long-term climate trends. The findings advocate for the co-development of intuitive, multilinguistic tools that provide necessary context to support climate risk reduction and adaptation strategies.

The Council on Strategic Risks (CSR) addresses the Russian invasion of Ukraine, emphasizing the convergence of the conflict with existing ecological, nuclear, and biological security crises. The organization highlights specific risks such as the seizure of the Chernobyl site, the potential for offensive biological weapons, and the geopolitical implications of a melting Arctic and dependence on Russian wheat.

CIEL condemns Russia's military action in Ukraine as a violation of international law and human rights, while highlighting how oil and natural gas fuel the crisis and are used as economic weapons.

The editorial calls for the European Union to provide material and humanitarian support to Ukraine and to intensify sanctions, specifically targeting the financial system and energy ties, in response to the Russian invasion.

The document argues that EU efforts to secure peace in Libya have been undermined by competing national interests, particularly between France and Italy, and a tendency to prioritize short-term goals like migration externalization and energy resource access. While the EU has successfully used Libya to limit migrant crossings through disputed agreements like the Valletta Memorandum, these same mechanisms have not translated into political stability. The author suggests that the EU should employ multi-track diplomacy and a concerted, unified approach that incorporates Libyan interests to achieve a sustainable peace.

The document analyzes Russia's use of 'soft power' in Africa, highlighting the role of state-owned outlets like RT and Sputnik in promoting anti-Western narratives. It details the transition from traditional media to digital influence campaigns, including the use of 'troll farms' and local proxies to sow division and build pro-Russian sentiment. The report specifically examines the Central African Republic as a case study of 'hybrid warfare,' where digital campaigns are combined with on-the-ground activities such as film production and the financing of local radio. While these efforts aim to project an image of Russia as a major power, the document notes they are conducted on a limited budget and face increasing detection by tech companies.

The document argues that carbon offsetting is often used to justify continued emissions and delay the necessary phase-out of fossil fuels. It distinguishes between 'avoidance offsets', which are deemed incompatible with net zero goals, and 'removal offsets', which face significant challenges regarding permanence, additionality, and scale. The authors contend that the current carbon market reproduces global inequalities and risks negative social outcomes, particularly in land-based projects. They recommend that governments and businesses eliminate avoidance offsets, prioritize direct emission reductions, and fund necessary carbon removals through non-market mechanisms such as public financing or mandates.

The US upstream oil and gas industry is projected to earn between $37 billion and $126 billion in additional profits in 2022 due to rising oil prices. The report argues that these gains are driven by global market integration and that companies may prioritize investor returns over increasing domestic production. It advocates for a windfall profits tax to return these gains to consumers.

The document examines the 'polycrisis' affecting Europe, where the cost of living crisis is driven by a combination of the pandemic, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and long-term neoliberal policies. It analyzes the disproportionate impact on young people, women, and the elderly, while exploring systemic failures in energy, housing, and food systems. The authors advocate for 'energy sobriety', the re-municipalisation of water, the expansion of social housing, and the revitalization of trade unions as essential steps toward a Green New Deal that ensures social justice and ecological sustainability.

The report provides an overview of global environmental governance in 2022, noting a return to face-to-face multilateralism after the pandemic. Key achievements include the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the launch of plastics treaty negotiations, and the agreement to establish a loss and damage fund for vulnerable countries. It also examines the integration of human rights into environmental policy and the impact of the war in Ukraine on environmental governance.