Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing reports a significant increase in Google Ads by oil companies globally and specifically in Brazil leading up to COP30 in November 2025. It highlights that while global oil ads spiked by 218% in October 2025, ads targeting Brazil increased by 2,900%, with Petrobras accounting for nearly 70% of these. The document argues that these campaigns are part of a broader disinformation strategy to secure a 'social licence' for continued fossil fuel investment, contrasting public 'green' narratives with actual investment patterns and environmental records. It recommends increased regulatory intervention, including a potential ban on fossil fuel advertising similar to tobacco regulations.

The report by Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD) critiques the Edelman Trust Barometer, alleging that the PR firm uses 'organized lying' and opaque data to promote the idea that business leaders are the most trusted figures in society. It highlights contradictions between Edelman's findings and other research from the UN and University of Oxford, particularly regarding public trust in corporate climate efforts. Furthermore, the document exposes a conflict of interest, noting that while Edelman claims climate change is a major crisis, it maintains extensive contracts with major fossil fuel companies including Shell, Chevron, and TotalEnergies.

The report identifies a significant increase in the volume of tweets featuring climate change denial terms starting in July 2022, though this growth was not matched by an increase in user engagement.

The study analyzed 113 top US climate disinformation sites, finding that nearly 80% displayed ads from major networks. Google's display networks were the most dominant, appearing on nearly half of the sites and accounting for 97.7% of projected weekly visits. The report argues that these platforms profit from climate disinformation despite having policies against misleading content, with Google potentially earning $7.6 million in revenue from these sites based on industry median cost-per-click estimates.

The report examines the digital footprint of 15 major Brazilian companies in the agribusiness, mining, and fossil fuel sectors, finding a wide disparity in the volume of sustainability communications. While all analyzed companies acknowledge climate change, the report identifies significant signs of greenwashing, including the use of vague language and green imagery to mask negative environmental impacts. It highlights a contradiction between corporate narratives—which frame these sectors as 'part of the solution'—and actual records, such as Petrobras, Vale, and Shell being among the top 10 companies most fined by Ibama between 2000 and 2025. Additionally, the report notes the use of targeted Meta advertising and influencer partnerships, particularly by Petrobras, to amplify sustainability messaging to younger audiences.

The document argues that the European Commission's designation of 19 platforms under the Digital Services Act (DSA) provides a critical opportunity to address climate disinformation, which CAAD claims derails climate action and threatens democratic processes. CAAD calls for these platforms to go beyond minimum compliance and apply safety-by-design principles globally, specifically targeting the monetisation of disinformation and the influence of the fossil fuel industry.

The report details the persistence of climate disinformation across major platforms like X, Meta, TikTok, and YouTube. It identifies key narratives used to discredit renewable energy, the use of extreme weather events (wildfires and hurricanes) to fuel conspiracy theories and incite violence, and the extensive use of Meta's advertising tools by fossil fuel entities for greenwashing and lobbying. The authors argue that platform architectures reward engagement over truth, necessitating systemic policy changes to disrupt the economy of disinformation.

The report argues that 'Big Carbon' (fossil fuel and agribusiness) and 'Big Tech' collaborate to create a 'false social reality' that makes the vast majority of people who support climate action feel like a minority. It details a history of obstruction, from the 1959 warnings to oil executives to the 2009 'Climategate' hack-and-leak attack, and analyzes modern digital tactics used to sabotage UN COPs. The document highlights specific disinformation trends in Brazil leading up to COP30, including the use of generative AI to create fake flood imagery. It concludes by proposing structural solutions such as the EU's Digital Services Act, greenwashing laws in France, and the Global Initiative on Information Integrity on Climate Change (GIIICC).

The report details the strategies used by carbon-intensive industries and big tech to obstruct climate policies through disinformation, polarising narratives, and digital 'distortion mirrors'. It highlights specific cases in Brazil, the historical impact of the 'Climagate' scandal, and the systemic role of social media platforms in creating a 'false social reality' that makes the majority of people who support climate action feel like a minority. The document advocates for structural solutions, such as the Global Initiative for Climate Change Information Integrity (GIIICC) and legislative measures like the EU's Digital Services Act, to protect the information environment ahead of COP30.

The report details how fossil fuel companies use paid advertising and 'organic' content on platforms like TikTok, Meta, Google, and X/Twitter to control the narrative around carbon capture and storage (CCS). It highlights Chevron's use of a 'low-budget' aesthetic and diverse ambassadors on TikTok to target Gen-Z, and the prevalence of industry-sponsored results at the top of Google searches for 'carbon capture'. The analysis also notes a trend where organic opposition to CCS on social media is sometimes driven by conspiracy theories, such as those involving 'The Great Reset' or vaccines, alongside good-faith scientific criticism.

The report finds that while the overall volume of posts using terms like "climate cult" or "eco terrorists" on X has remained stable, the number of replies containing dehumanising language has more than doubled. On Facebook and Instagram, over 68,000 posts used denigrating terms, reaching a cumulative 1.86 million shares. TikTok users employ "coded violence" and "dog whistles" to evade moderation, with comments frequently endorsing police violence, including the use of cattle prods and pepper spray. The report argues that this digital rhetoric creates a "pipeline to violence," citing the 2023 fatal shooting of protesters in Panama and the broader criminalisation of environmental defenders.

The document outlines a shift from climate denial to 'discourses of climate delay' and provides a toolkit for 'pre-bunking' and rebutting misinformation. It emphasizes targeting 'Persuadables'—people without strong opinions on climate action—and using specific framing and paid media to break through social media echo chambers.

The report identifies a resurgence of climate denial and the rise of 'delayism' during COP27, highlighting how fossil fuel-linked entities used Meta's advertising tools for greenwashing and how Twitter's algorithms surfaced the #ClimateScam hashtag despite lower engagement than pro-climate terms. It details a 'narrative playbook' where climate action is framed as an elitist plot or a 'culture war' issue, often overlapping with anti-vaccine and right-wing conspiracy communities.

The report identifies three primary ecosystems driving climate mis- and disinformation: the 'attention economy' of online influencers, state-affiliated networks (specifically Russia), and the fossil fuel lobby. It details how the #ClimateScam hashtag has gained prominence on X, how ad tech companies monetise websites hosting climate denial, how Russian state media instrumentalises climate topics for geopolitical influence, and how fossil fuel companies use Facebook advertising for greenwashing. The document argues that these efforts undermine the public mandate for Net Zero and calls for structural changes to digital platform incentives and greater transparency in ad tech.

The document details the methodology for four distinct research areas: the analysis of the #ClimateScam hashtag and X's auto-complete function; the identification of 15 monetized websites sharing climate disinformation and the ad exchanges supporting them; the monitoring of Russian state media and diplomatic accounts on Facebook across four languages; and the collection of political advertising from major fossil fuel companies and petrostates via the Meta Ad Library.

The report finds that climate disinformation is widespread across Australia, Brazil, Germany, India, the UK, and the USA, with between 55% and 85% of surveyed populations believing at least one misinformation statement. Significant gaps exist between public perception and scientific consensus regarding the human cause of climate change and the role of natural gas. The study highlights that regular news consumption does not necessarily correlate with better scientific understanding and, in some cases, is linked to higher belief in misinformation narratives. Additionally, a substantial portion of respondents in all six countries believe their nations cannot afford to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

The document advocates for banning fossil fuel advertisements to prevent the industry from using greenwashing and disinformation to maintain its 'social license to operate'. It highlights existing partial bans in France and efforts in 10 countries, including Australia, Canada, Ireland, and South Africa, as well as over 50 cities. The text compares the fossil fuel industry to the tobacco industry, suggesting that similar regulatory tools are needed to protect public health and enable climate action. It also discusses the role of litigation, corporate campaigns like Clean Creatives, and the targeting of advertising finances to dismantle the industry's influence on public opinion.

The document argues that the rapid growth of generative AI is driving a significant increase in electricity demand, which threatens climate goals by incentivising the continued use of fossil fuels and diverting clean energy resources. It highlights a lack of transparency in corporate emissions reporting, where 'market-based' accounting masks actual grid impacts, and warns that 'moonshot' technology promises like nuclear fusion may act as mitigation deterrence. Specific examples include data centre growth in Ireland and Malaysia, and the rising emissions profiles of companies like Microsoft and Google.

The document outlines ten best practices for journalists to counter climate misinformation, emphasizing the need to assess the visibility of false claims before reporting and using specific communication techniques like the 'truth sandwich' to avoid reinforcing myths.

The letter argues that large language models (LLMs) increase carbon emissions through high energy demands and accelerate the spread of climate disinformation. It calls for mandatory reporting on energy use, emissions, and critical mineral consumption, as well as safeguards against AI-generated disinformation.