Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The fact sheet compares two scenarios for meeting U.S. 2025 decarbonization targets: a 'Policy Solutions' package starting in 2016 and a 'Delayed' scenario starting in 2020. It finds that delaying action by four years would cost nearly $400 billion in lost cumulative savings by 2030 and result in less than three-quarters of the total greenhouse gas abatement over the 15-year period. The document emphasizes that early adoption leverages natural capital stock turnover in vehicles and buildings, whereas delayed action requires more aggressive and costly measures, such as higher carbon taxes and accelerated coal plant retirements, to reach the same 2030 emissions levels.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Implementing the 'Policy Solutions' package starting in 2016 is projected to generate approximately $840 billion in cumulative savings between 2016 and 2030, with annual economy-wide savings reaching $122 billion in 2030 alone.
  • Delaying the implementation of these policies until 2020 would result in a loss of $394 billion in cumulative savings by 2030, as the 'Delayed' scenario only reaches cumulative savings of about $445 billion compared to the $839 billion from the 'Policy Solutions' package.
  • A delayed start reduces the overall effectiveness of emissions abatement; despite reaching the same annual emissions level in 2030 as the early package, the delayed scenario achieves less than 75% of the total greenhouse gas abatement over the 15-year period.
  • To achieve the same 2030 emissions targets after a delay, the 'Delayed' scenario requires more aggressive measures: retiring an additional 2.2 gigawatts of coal power plants annually and increasing the carbon tax to $60 per ton by 2030, compared to $50 per ton in the original package.

Cite the original document

APA
Energy Innovation (2015). THE COSTS OF DELAY. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/CostsDelay.pdf
Chicago
Energy Innovation. THE COSTS OF DELAY. 2015. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/CostsDelay.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Energy Innovation |title=THE COSTS OF DELAY |date=October 2015 |url=https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/CostsDelay.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{energyinnovation2015costs, author = {{Energy Innovation}}, title = {{THE COSTS OF DELAY}}, institution = {Energy Innovation}, year = {2015}, month = oct, url = {https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/CostsDelay.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated