{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"organization":["Union of Concerned Scientists"]},"warnings":[]},"total":{"value":1285,"relation":"eq"},"page":50,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?organization=union-of-concerned-scientists&page=50","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"ucs-001138","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001138","title":"Georgia’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Georgia.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Georgia was the highest spender on net coal imports in the United States, sending $2.62 billion out of state. The state's electricity generation relied on coal for 62.7% of its power despite having no internal coal supplies. The document argues that investing in energy efficiency and homegrown renewables, such as biomass from the forestry industry, solar, and wind, could improve energy independence and local economic development.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001138#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Georgia spent more on total net coal imports than any other U.S. state, totaling $2.62 billion. The state's dependence is further highlighted by the fact that it spent the second most on net imports per person ($270) and the third most relative to gross state product (0.66 percent).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001138#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Georgia Power, a subsidiary of Southern Company, is the primary driver of these imports, purchasing nearly all of the state's imported coal at a cost of $2.56 billion. Specifically, the Bowen plant in Euharlee spent $706 million on coal imports, the highest amount of any single facility in the U.S., and is the third-largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among coal plants nationwide.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001138#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Despite having no internal coal supplies, coal provided 62.7% of Georgia's in-state electricity generation in 2008. The state is the 7th most dependent on net imports as a share of total power use, at 65 percent.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001138#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Georgia has significant untapped renewable energy potential that could technically meet at least 84% of its 2008 power demand. This includes solar power, small-scale hydropower, offshore wind power, and sustainable biomass from the forestry industry. However, some biomass is currently exported; for example, a plant in Waycross expected to be completed in 2011 will produce 750,000 tons of wood pellets annually for export to Europe.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001138#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Energy efficiency is presented as a highly cost-effective alternative to coal imports. In 2007, Georgia spent only 50 cents per person on ratepayer-funded efficiency programs, which is approximately 540 times less than its spending on imported coal. A 1% annual reduction in electricity use could save consumers $79 million and prevent $41 million from leaving the state in the first year.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001138#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power station","energy efficiency","renewable energy","biomass","solar energy","small hydro","offshore wind power","carbon dioxide emissions"],"geography_discussed":["United States","Wyoming","South America","Colombia","Europe"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001139","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001139","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Illinois.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Illinois imported 94 percent of the coal used in its power plants, resulting in a net expenditure of $683 million. The document highlights that Midwest Generation and the Baldwin Energy Complex are major contributors to this import dependency. To mitigate these costs and reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the report advocates for the state's energy efficiency resource standard and its renewable energy goals, noting that Illinois has the technical potential to generate over five times its 2008 electricity needs from renewable sources, primarily wind and bioenergy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001139#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Illinois imported 94 percent of the coal burned in its power plants, sending $1.49 billion out of state, primarily to Wyoming. After accounting for $806 million in coal exports to other states, the state's net expenditure on imported coal was $683 million.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001139#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Midwest Generation, a subsidiary of Edison Mission Energy, was the largest importer of coal in the state, spending $512 million. The Baldwin Energy Complex in Randolph County is identified as the most import-dependent facility in Illinois, spending $209 million in 2008 and ranking as the thirtieth-largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among coal plants nationwide.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001139#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Illinois has established a renewable electricity standard requiring utilities to supply 25 percent of the state's power from renewable resources by 2025. The state has the technical capacity to generate more than five times its 2008 electricity needs from renewables, specifically wind and bioenergy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001139#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Since 2007, Illinois has installed over 1,700 megawatts of wind energy capacity. An example is the 102-megawatt Top Crop wind facility in LaSalle County, which began operations in 2009 and provides enough energy for more than 30,000 homes.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001139#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The state has adopted an energy efficiency resource standard requiring utilities to achieve annual electricity demand cuts that increase to 2 percent by 2015. This follows a period in 2007 where ratepayer-funded efficiency spending was only six cents per person.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001139#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power station","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind energy","bioenergy","carbon dioxide emissions"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming","Randolph County","LaSalle County"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001140","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001140","title":"Iowa’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Iowa.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Iowa imported all the coal used by its power plants, resulting in $496 million leaving the state, primarily to Wyoming. Coal accounted for 76.1% of Iowa's electricity generation, making the state the second most dependent on net imports as a share of total power use (78%). To reduce this dependence, Iowa is utilizing energy efficiency programs and renewable energy, specifically wind power, where it has over 3,600 megawatts of installed capacity.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001140#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Iowa imported 100% of the coal used by its power plants, which cost the state $496 million, with the majority of these funds going to Wyoming.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001140#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal was the dominant source of electricity in Iowa in 2008, providing 76.1% of generation. This reliance placed Iowa as the 2nd most dependent state on net imports as a share of total power use at 78%.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001140#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Iowa's other 2008 electricity sources included nuclear (10.0%), non-hydro renewables (8.0%), natural gas (4.1%), and hydroelectric (1.5%).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001140#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Iowa is leveraging wind power and bioenergy to increase energy independence, with wind power already reaching over 3,600 megawatts of installed capacity.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001140#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Iowa invested nearly $19 per person in ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs in 2007, which reduced electricity use by 0.7%.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001140#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","electricity generation","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","bioenergy"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","energy profile"]},{"id":"ucs-001141","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001141","title":"Kansas’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Kansas.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Kansas imported over 99 percent of the coal used by its power plants, primarily from Wyoming, resulting in a net outflow of $516 million. Coal provided 72.9 percent of the state's electricity mix. The document argues that investing in energy efficiency and leveraging the state's high technical potential for wind and bioenergy could reduce this dependence and boost the local economy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001141#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Kansas was heavily dependent on imported coal for its power plants, importing more than 99 percent of the coal it burned, primarily from Wyoming. This resulted in $518 million leaving the state, while in-state mines exported $2 million to other states, creating a net expenditure of $516 million on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001141#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal was the dominant source of electricity in Kansas in 2008, accounting for 72.9 percent of the mix. Compared to other states, Kansas ranked 3rd most dependent on net imports as a share of total power use (73 percent), 7th most in net import spending per person ($185), and 10th most in net import spending relative to gross state product (0.42 percent).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001141#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The document identifies a significant gap in energy efficiency investment, noting that in 2007, Kansas spent only $2.44 per person on ratepayer-funded electricity efficiency programs, which is approximately 75 times less than the per capita spending on net coal imports. A 1 percent annual reduction in electricity use could save consumers nearly $18 million and reduce out-of-state payments by up to $6 million in the first year.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001141#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Kansas possesses substantial renewable energy potential, specifically in wind and bioenergy, with the technical capacity to generate nearly 79 times its 2008 electricity needs. To address coal dependence, Kansas utilities are required to ensure renewable resources provide at least 20 percent of peak power demand by 2020.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001141#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","bioenergy","energy independence","electricity generation"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001142","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001142","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Massachusetts.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Massachusetts imported all the coal used by its power plants, primarily from Colombia, resulting in $252 million leaving the state economy. The state relies on coal for 24.5% of its in-state electricity generation despite having no domestic coal supplies. To reduce this dependence, Massachusetts has implemented aggressive energy efficiency targets, including a $1.7 billion investment from 2010 to 2012, and is expanding renewable energy through programs like Commonwealth Solar and the first US offshore wind facility in Nantucket Sound.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001142#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Massachusetts imported all of the coal used by its power plants, primarily from Colombia, which resulted in $252 million being sent out of the state. Of this, $206 million was spent on international imports, ranking Massachusetts 3rd highest among US states for international coal import spending.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001142#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Dominion Energy New England purchased all of the state's imported coal, with its Brayton Point plant in Somerset spending $214 million on imports, the highest amount of any coal plant in Massachusetts.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001142#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal accounted for 24.5% of Massachusetts' in-state electricity generation in 2008. Additionally, retail electricity sales exceeded in-state production by 24%, indicating the state imports further electricity that may be coal-derived.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001142#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Massachusetts is pursuing energy efficiency to replace coal-fired power, spending $120 million on ratepayer-funded programs in 2007 and committing over $1.7 billion to electricity efficiency between 2010 and 2012. Starting in 2012, utilities must reduce electricity use by 2.4% annually.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001142#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The state is expanding renewable energy through the Commonwealth Solar program, which funded 23.5 megawatts of solar power across 1,200+ buildings, and the development of an offshore wind facility in Nantucket Sound. Massachusetts has a mandate for renewable resources to provide over 23% of its power by 2025 and possesses the technical potential to meet 90% of its 2008 electricity needs via in-state renewables.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001142#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","solar energy","offshore wind power","bioenergy","electricity generation","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["Colombia","Somerset","Nantucket Sound","Cape Cod","Martha's Vineyard","Nantucket","Newburyport"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001143","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001143","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Michigan.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Michigan imported all the coal used by its power plants, resulting in an economic drain of $1.36 billion. The state's electricity generation relied on coal for over 60% of its needs, with Detroit Edison's Monroe facility identified as the most import-dependent plant. To reduce this dependence and stimulate the local economy, the document advocates for investments in energy efficiency and homegrown renewable energy, noting that Michigan has the technical potential to produce nearly twice its 2008 electricity needs from renewables, primarily wind and bioenergy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001143#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Michigan's total expenditure on coal imports in 2008 was $1.36 billion, as the state imported all the coal its power plants burned, primarily from Montana, Kentucky, and Wyoming.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001143#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Detroit Edison, the largest electricity provider in Michigan, accounted for more than half of the state's total coal imports, spending $781 million. Its Monroe facility was the most import-dependent plant in the state, spending $379 million in 2008 and ranking as the seventh-largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among hundreds of coal plants in the US.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001143#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"In 2008, coal provided 60.3% of Michigan's in-state electricity generation. Nationally, Michigan ranked 5th in net weight of coal imports (36 million tons), 7th in spending on net imports, and 9th in dependence on net imports as a share of total power use.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001143#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Michigan has the technical capacity to generate nearly double its 2008 electricity requirements through renewable energy, specifically wind and bioenergy. The state requires utilities to source at least 10% of power from renewables by 2015.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001143#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Michigan lacked a ratepayer-funded electricity efficiency program in 2007, but in 2008 it began requiring utilities to reduce annual electricity use, targeting a 1% annual savings by 2012.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001143#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power station","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","bioenergy","carbon dioxide emissions","energy transition"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming","Kentucky","Montana","Monroe"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic assessment","policy analysis"]},{"id":"ucs-001144","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001144","title":"Mississippi’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Mississippi.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Mississippi relied on coal for 34.6% of its electricity generation, importing over 70% of that coal and spending $457 million out of state. The document argues that the state can reduce this dependence by investing in energy efficiency—noting that 2007 ratepayer-funded efficiency spending was 1,400 times lower per person than spending on imported coal—and by utilizing local renewable resources such as forestry by-products, switchgrass, solar, and geothermal energy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001144#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, coal accounted for 34.6% of Mississippi's electricity generation, with the state importing more than 70% of that coal, including sources from Wyoming and Colombia.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001144#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Mississippi spent $457 million out of state to pay for coal imports. Compared to other states, Mississippi ranked 4th highest in spending on international imports ($145 million), 5th highest in net imports relative to gross state product (0.50 percent), and 12th highest in net imports per person ($155).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001144#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"There is a significant disparity between Mississippi's spending on imported coal and its investment in energy efficiency; in 2007, ratepayer-funded electricity efficiency programs received only 11 cents per person, which is approximately 1,400 times less than the per-person expenditure on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001144#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Reducing annual electricity use by 1% could save consumers $18 million and prevent up to $13 million from leaving the state in the first year. Additionally, the state's renewable energy resources could technically meet over 90% of its 2008 power demand.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001144#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Potential local energy alternatives for Mississippi include forestry industry by-products, switchgrass, solar energy, small-scale hydropower, and geothermal energy co-produced from oil and gas drilling sites.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001144#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","solar energy","small hydro","geothermal energy","biomass","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["Colombia","Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001145","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001145","title":"Missouri’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Missouri.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"Missouri is highly dependent on imported coal, spending $1.13 billion in 2008 to import over 99% of the coal used by its power plants. The document highlights that this expenditure represents a significant economic drain, suggesting that energy efficiency standards and renewable energy resources, such as wind and bioenergy, could redirect funds back into the local economy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001145#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Missouri was the most dependent state on net coal imports as a share of total power use at 82 percent. The state imported more than 99 percent of the coal used by its power plants, primarily from Wyoming, resulting in a net outflow of $1.13 billion.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001145#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"AmerenUE is the largest importer of coal in Missouri, spending $565 million in 2008. Its Labadie plant in Franklin County is the state's most import-dependent facility, spending $241 million that year, and ranks as the eleventh-largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among coal plants in the United States.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001145#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Missouri's investment in energy efficiency is low, spending only 22 cents per person on ratepayer-funded programs in 2007. The document suggests that reducing electricity use by 1 percent annually could save consumers $30 million and prevent $13 million from leaving the state in the first year.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001145#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Missouri has significant renewable energy potential, specifically in wind and bioenergy, with the technical capacity to generate nearly nine times its 2008 electricity needs. Since 2007, over 300 megawatts of wind power have been installed, and companies like Show Me Energy are producing electricity from crop residues and native perennial grasses.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001145#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","bioenergy","carbon dioxide emissions"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming","Franklin County"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001146","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001146","title":"Nebraska’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Nebraska.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Nebraska imported all the coal used by its power plants from Wyoming, resulting in $198 million leaving the state. Coal provided 66.3% of the state's electricity mix that year. The document argues that Nebraska could reduce this dependence by investing in energy efficiency—noting that 2007 spending on efficiency programs was 200 times lower per capita than spending on net coal imports—and by leveraging its wind and bioenergy resources through a renewable electricity standard.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001146#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Nebraska imported 100% of the coal used by its power plants from Wyoming, costing the state $198 million.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001146#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal was the primary source of electricity in Nebraska in 2008, accounting for 66.3% of the mix, while nuclear power provided 29.3%.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001146#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Nebraska's investment in energy efficiency is significantly lower than its spending on coal imports; in 2007, ratepayer-funded efficiency programs cost 53 cents per person, which is 200 times less than the per capita spend on net coal imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001146#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Nebraska possesses the technical capacity to generate more than 100 times its 2008 electricity requirements using renewable energy, specifically wind and bioenergy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001146#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Compared to other states, Nebraska ranks as the 6th most dependent on net imports as a share of total power use (67%) and the 18th highest spender on net imports per person ($111).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001146#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","bioenergy","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy recommendation"]},{"id":"ucs-001147","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001147","title":"New Hampshire\u0010s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-New-Hampshire.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, New Hampshire spent $133 million on imported coal, primarily sourced from South America, to support approximately 15% of its in-state electricity generation. The Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) was the sole purchaser of these imports, with the Merrimack Station plant spending $79 million. The document argues that investing in energy efficiency and homegrown renewables, such as the Northern Wood Power Project, can redirect these funds into the local economy. New Hampshire has a mandate for utilities to supply about 24% of power needs from renewable resources by 2025.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001147#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"New Hampshire's power plants relied entirely on imported coal in 2008, resulting in a $133 million outflow of funds from the state, with a significant portion of the coal originating from South America.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001147#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH) purchased all the state's imported coal, and its Merrimack Station plant in Bow was the largest spender, paying $79 million for imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001147#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal accounted for approximately 15.1% of New Hampshire's in-state electricity generation in 2008, despite the state having no internal coal supplies.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001147#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"New Hampshire is utilizing renewable energy to decrease coal dependence, exemplified by the Northern Wood Power Project in Portsmouth, which converted a unit at the Schiller Station facility to burn waste-wood and can power roughly 50,000 homes.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001147#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The state has established a renewable electricity standard requiring utilities to provide approximately 24% of power needs from renewable sources by 2025.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001147#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","bioenergy","electricity generation"],"geography_discussed":["South America","Colombia","Venezuela","Bow","Portsmouth"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001148","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001148","title":"New Jersey\u0019s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-New-Jersey.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, New Jersey imported all the coal used by its power plants, resulting in $347 million leaving the state, including $93 million for international imports from countries such as Indonesia and Venezuela. While coal provided 14.1% of in-state electricity production, the state's overall energy demand exceeded its generation by 26%. The document argues that New Jersey can reduce this dependence by adopting energy efficiency resource standards and leveraging its technical potential for solar, bioenergy, and offshore wind, noting a state requirement for renewables to supply approximately 22% of power needs by 2020.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001148#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, New Jersey imported 100% of the coal used by its power plants, with some sourced from Indonesia. This resulted in a total of $347 million being sent out of state to pay for these imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001148#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"New Jersey ranked 7th among profiled states for spending on international coal imports, totaling $93 million. Specific international expenditures included $65 million to Indonesia and $28 million to Venezuela.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001148#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal accounted for 14.1% of New Jersey's in-state electricity production in 2008. However, the state's retail customers purchased 26% more power than the state generated internally, suggesting further imports of electricity that may have been coal-derived.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001148#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"New Jersey has the technical capacity to meet 30% of its 2008 electricity requirements through renewable energy, specifically solar and bioenergy. Additionally, the state has mandated that utilities provide approximately 22% of power from renewable resources by 2020.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001148#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The document suggests that New Jersey could increase energy independence by adopting energy efficiency resource standards. In 2007, the state spent over $11 per person on ratepayer-funded efficiency programs, which reduced electricity use by 0.3%, though this spending was 3.5 times less than the state's expenditure on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001148#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","solar energy","bioenergy","offshore wind power","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["Indonesia","Venezuela","Mid-Atlantic"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["financial analysis","energy mix analysis"]},{"id":"ucs-001149","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001149","title":"New York’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-New-York.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, New York imported 100% of the coal used for its electricity generation, resulting in $472 million leaving the state. While coal provided 13.6% of the state's electricity mix, New York has implemented an energy efficiency resource standard to reduce power demand by nearly 2% annually starting in 2011 and a renewable electricity standard requiring 30% of power from renewables by 2015.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001149#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, New York imported all of the coal used by its power plants, with some sourced from South America. This resulted in $472 million being sent out of state to pay for these imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001149#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal accounted for 13.6% of New York's electricity generation mix in 2008. The state ranked 10th among states for spending on international coal imports, totaling $63 million.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001149#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"New York has established an energy efficiency resource standard that mandates utilities to lower power demand by nearly 2% every year starting in 2011.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001149#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The state has a technical capacity to meet 83% of its 2008 electricity requirements through renewable energy, specifically wind, solar, and bioenergy. To advance this, New York requires utilities to source 30% of the state's power from renewable resources by 2015.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001149#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","electricity generation","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","solar energy","bioenergy","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["South America","Venezuela","Colombia"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["financial analysis","energy mix assessment","policy review"]},{"id":"ucs-001150","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001150","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-North-Carolina.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"North Carolina spent $2.35 billion on imported coal in 2008, ranking second among US states for total net imports. The document highlights that the state relies on coal for 60.5% of its electricity generation despite having no in-state coal supplies. It advocates for a transition to energy efficiency and homegrown renewables, such as biomass, solar, wind, and small-scale hydropower, to reduce this economic drain and improve energy independence.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001150#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, North Carolina spent $2.35 billion on net coal imports, the second highest total among US states. The state ranked third for net imports per person ($254), fourth for net imports relative to gross state product (0.59 percent), and seventh in net weight (29.4 million tons).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001150#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"North Carolina's electricity generation in 2008 was heavily dependent on coal (60.5%) and nuclear power (31.7%), with coal being entirely imported from sources as far as Wyoming and Colombia.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001150#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Duke Energy was the state's largest importer of coal, spending $1.27 billion in 2008. The Roxboro plant in Semora, operated by Progress Energy Carolina, was the most import-dependent facility in the state, spending $550 million in 2008 and ranking as the twenty-sixth-largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among US coal plants.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001150#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The document argues that North Carolina under-invests in energy efficiency, spending only 75 cents per person on ratepayer-funded programs in 2007, which is approximately 340 times less than its spending on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001150#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"North Carolina has a renewable electricity and energy efficiency portfolio standard requiring utilities to reach 12.5 percent of electricity demand by 2021. The state has potential in biomass, solar, small-scale hydropower, and wind power (land-based and offshore) that could technically exceed its 2008 power demand by more than 2.5 times.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001150#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power station","energy efficiency","renewable energy","biomass","solar energy","wind power","hydropower","carbon dioxide emissions","climate change","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming","Colombia"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001151","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001151","title":"Ohio’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Ohio.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"Ohio experienced a significant economic drain in 2008 due to its heavy reliance on imported coal, spending a net $1.49 billion on these imports. The document highlights that coal provided 85.2% of the state's electricity in 2008 and suggests that transitioning to energy efficiency and homegrown renewables, such as wind and solar, can stimulate local economic development and increase energy independence.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001151#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Ohio's power plants imported nearly three-quarters of the coal they used, resulting in $1.87 billion sent out of state. After accounting for $381 million in coal exports from in-state mines, the state's net expenditure on imported coal was $1.49 billion, ranking it 5th highest in net imports and 6th highest in net weight (32.7 million tons) compared to other states.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001151#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"First Energy Generation is the largest importer of coal in Ohio, accounting for 30% of the state's gross total with $570 million in purchases. Specifically, the W.H. Sammis plant in Stratton spent $291 million on coal imports, making it the highest-spending plant in the state and the 21st largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among coal plants nationwide.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001151#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Ohio's electricity generation in 2008 was dominated by coal at 85.2%, the second-highest percentage among the states profiled. Other sources included nuclear (11.4%), natural gas (1.6%), and others below 1.1%.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001151#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"To reduce coal dependence, Ohio implemented an energy efficiency resource standard in 2008 requiring utilities to reduce power demand by an average of 1.3% annually from 2009 to 2025. Additionally, the state has a renewable electricity standard requiring at least 12.5% of power needs to be met by renewables by 2025.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001151#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Ohio has the technical potential to generate nearly 1.3 times its 2008 electricity demand from renewables, primarily wind and bioenergy. Current developments include three large-scale wind projects totaling nearly 500 MW and an expansion of First Solar's Perryville manufacturing facility, which will produce 213 MW of PV modules annually and support over 1,000 jobs.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001151#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind power","photovoltaics","bioenergy","carbon dioxide emissions","climate change"],"geography_discussed":["Montana","Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001152","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001152","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-South-Carolina.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"South Carolina spent $1.1 billion on net coal imports in 2008, ranking 11th highest in total net imports in the U.S. The state relies on coal for 40.6% of its electricity generation despite having no in-state coal supplies. The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that investing in energy efficiency and homegrown renewables, such as offshore wind and solar, could redirect funds back into the local economy and improve energy independence.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001152#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, South Carolina spent $1.1 billion on net coal imports, ranking it 2nd among U.S. states for net imports relative to gross state product (0.70 percent), 4th for net imports per person ($245), and 11th for total net imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001152#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Santee Cooper, the state's largest power producer, accounted for approximately 40% of the state's total coal imports, spending $453 million. Its Cross generating station near Pineville was the most import-dependent facility in the state, spending $276 million in 2008 and ranking as the 36th largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among U.S. coal plants.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001152#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"South Carolina's electricity generation in 2008 was 50.6% nuclear, 40.6% coal, 5.6% natural gas, 1.8% non-hydro renewables, and 1.1% hydroelectric. The state produces 25% more electricity than its retail customers purchase, suggesting that some power from in-state coal plants is exported.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001152#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The document suggests that reducing annual electricity use by 1% could save consumers $39 million and prevent $21 million from leaving the state in the first year. However, in 2007, South Carolina spent 120 times less per capita on ratepayer-funded electricity efficiency programs than it did on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001152#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"South Carolina has the technical potential for renewable energy resources to supply more than 2.5 times its 2008 power demand, including offshore wind, solar, small-scale hydro, and sustainable forestry by-products. The state is already a manufacturing hub for wind technology, with companies like GE Energy in Greenville, Timken in Union, Kaydon in Sumter, and IMO Group in Dorchester County.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001152#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power station","energy efficiency","renewable energy","offshore wind power","solar energy","hydropower","carbon dioxide emissions","biomass"],"geography_discussed":["Colombia","United States"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic assessment","policy recommendation"]},{"id":"ucs-001153","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001153","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Tennessee.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"Tennessee spent a net $1.21 billion on imported coal in 2008, importing over 99 percent of the coal used by its power plants. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is the primary purchaser of these imports, with the Cumberland plant identified as the state's most import-dependent facility. To reduce this economic drain, the document suggests adopting an energy efficiency resource standard and a renewable electricity standard, noting that wind, solar, small-scale hydropower, and biomass could technically meet up to 60 percent of the state's 2008 power demand.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001153#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Tennessee imported more than 99 percent of the coal used by its power plants, resulting in a net expenditure of $1.21 billion on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001153#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) purchases nearly all of the state's imported coal, with the Cumberland plant in Cumberland City spending $314 million in 2008, making it the most import-dependent facility in the state and the fourteenth-largest source of carbon dioxide emissions among coal plants in the US.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001153#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Tennessee ranks highly in coal import dependence: it spent the 5th most on net imports per person ($194), the 6th most relative to gross state product (0.48 percent), and the 8th most in total net imports ($1.21 billion).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001153#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","energy efficiency","renewable energy","carbon dioxide emissions","solar energy","wind power","hydropower","biomass"],"geography_discussed":["Utah","Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy recommendation"]},{"id":"ucs-001154","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001154","title":"Texas’s Dependence on Imported Coal","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Texas.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Texas imported 63 percent of the coal used for its electricity generation, primarily from Wyoming, resulting in $1.91 billion leaving the state. While Texas leads the US in wind energy capacity, the document argues that its energy efficiency targets remain modest compared to other states and that the state possesses significant untapped renewable energy potential.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001154#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"In 2008, Texas imported 63 percent of the coal used for its electricity generation, with the vast majority originating from Wyoming. This resulted in $1.91 billion being sent out of state to pay for these imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001154#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Texas had the highest net weight of coal imports compared to other US states at 64.6 million tons and ranked third in total spending on net imports.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001154#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Coal accounted for 36.3 percent of Texas's electricity sources in 2008, while natural gas was the largest source at 47.7 percent.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001154#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Texas's investment in ratepayer-funded electricity efficiency programs in 2007 was 3.33 cents per person, which is approximately 23 times less than the state's spending on imported coal.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001154#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Texas is the national leader in wind energy with over 9,400 megawatts of installed capacity and has the technical potential to generate more than 17 times its 2008 electricity needs from renewables, including solar and bioenergy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001154#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal","electricity generation","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind energy","solar energy","bioenergy","energy independence"],"geography_discussed":["Wyoming","United States"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-001155","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-001155","title":"Burning Coal, Burning Cash","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-05","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/UCS-BCBC-factsheet-Wisconsin.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"In 2008, Wisconsin spent $853 million to import all the coal used by its power plants from nine other states. The state is the 5th most dependent on net imports as a share of total power use (68%). We Energies is the largest importer, spending $313 million, with its Pleasant Prairie facility being the most import-dependent site. To reduce this dependence, the document suggests expanding energy efficiency resource standards and leveraging renewable energy, noting that Wisconsin has the technical potential to generate 4.2 times its 2008 electricity needs from renewables, primarily wind and bioenergy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001155#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Wisconsin is heavily dependent on imported coal for its electricity, spending $853 million in 2008 to import all the coal burned by its power plants from nine different states.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001155#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Compared to other US states, Wisconsin ranks 5th in dependence on net imports as a share of total power use, at 68 percent, and 12th in total net import spending, net import weight (25 million tons), and net imports relative to gross state product (0.35 percent).","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001155#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"We Energies is the state's largest electricity provider and the biggest importer of coal, accounting for $313 million in imports, which is approximately 30 percent of the state's total. Its Pleasant Prairie facility in Kenosha County is the most import-dependent facility, spending $127 million in 2008.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001155#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Wisconsin has significant renewable energy potential, with the technical capacity to generate 4.2 times its 2008 electricity needs, primarily through wind and bioenergy. Current law requires utilities to use renewable resources for 10 percent of the state's power by 2015.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-001155#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["coal-fired power station","energy efficiency","renewable energy","wind energy","bioenergy"],"geography_discussed":["Kenosha County","Columbia County","Rothschild","Montfort"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["economic analysis","policy assessment"]},{"id":"ucs-000769","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-000769","title":"National Clean Vehicle Program: Creating a Combined Standard","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-04","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/How-the-Federal-and-State-Clean-Car-Standards-Work-Together.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The National Clean Vehicle Program harmonizes fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards for light-duty vehicles through model year 2016, involving the NHTSA, EPA, and California Air Resources Board (CARB). The program aims to increase average fuel economy to nearly 34.1 mpg and reduce global warming tailpipe pollution by approximately 25% via a fleetwide target of 250 grams per mile. While California agreed to accept these federal standards through 2016, it retains the legal authority to set more stringent standards in the future.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000769#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The National Clean Vehicle Program coordinates three independent standards from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to ensure complementary stringency for model years 2012-2016.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000769#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"For model years 2012 through 2016, the new standards are projected to raise the average fuel economy of light-duty vehicles to nearly 34.1 miles per gallon, representing an increase of almost 30 percent over previous levels.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000769#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The EPA has established a fleetwide target of 250 grams per mile for tailpipe pollution, which is estimated to reduce global warming emissions by approximately 25 percent.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000769#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Under the 2009 agreement, California agreed to accept federal standards through model year 2016 provided they meet the state's required stringency, though California maintains its legal right to implement more stringent standards in subsequent years.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000769#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["greenhouse gas emissions","transport industry"],"geography_discussed":["California"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy analysis"]},{"id":"ucs-000853","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/ucs-000853","title":"National Clean Vehicle Program: Model Year 2012-2016 Standards","publisher":{"name":"Union of Concerned Scientists","organization":"union-of-concerned-scientists"},"document_type":"fact sheet","language":"en","date_published":"2010-04","source_url":"https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/2019-09/National-Clean-Car-Standards-Fact-Sheet.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The U.S. EPA and DOT finalized national greenhouse gas and fuel economy standards for model year 2012-2016 vehicles, aiming to increase combined average fuel economy to 34.1 mpg and reduce tailpipe emissions to 250 grams per mile. These standards, resulting from a compromise between the White House, automakers, and fourteen states, are projected to save consumers billions of dollars, reduce oil consumption by 1.2 million barrels per day, and cut global warming emissions by 209 million metric tons by 2020.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000853#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The new standards for model year 2012-2016 vehicles are expected to increase the combined average fuel economy of new passenger cars and light trucks to 34.1 mpg, compared to a then-current fleet efficiency of 26.4 mpg. This represents a nearly 30 percent increase in fuel economy.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000853#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The regulations establish the first national greenhouse gas tailpipe emissions standard for vehicles at 250 grams per mile, which is approximately 25 percent lower than the emissions of the average new vehicle at the time of publication.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000853#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"UCS analysis predicts that by 2020, the standards will result in significant economic and environmental gains: saving consumers $34 billion (at $2.75 per gallon) or $58 billion (at $4 per gallon), reducing U.S. oil consumption by about 1.2 million barrels per day, and cutting global warming emissions by 209 million metric tons.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000853#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The standards are projected to stimulate job growth by 2020, potentially creating up to 20,000 new positions within the auto industry and up to 200,000 jobs nationwide.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000853#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The national program was developed as a White House-brokered compromise to provide automakers with a single national compliance framework that is equivalent in stringency to the standards sought by California and thirteen other states.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"ucs-000853#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["greenhouse gas emissions","fuel consumption","energy security","transport policy"],"geography_discussed":["California","Saudi Arabia","Kuwait"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["impact assessment","policy analysis"]}]}