Search Climate Insights Directory

The document proposes a suite of financing mechanisms to fund a Universal Basic Income Guarantee (UBIG) in South Africa, focusing on progressive taxation and the reduction of government waste. Key proposals include a ring-fenced Social Security Tax, a Resource Rent Tax on extractive industries, and a wealth tax for the top 1% of the population. The brief argues that many UBIG scenarios, particularly those aligned with national poverty lines, are immediately affordable without borrowing if these revenue-generating measures and VAT recoupments are implemented.

The document outlines a comprehensive modeling framework designed to assess the impact of three policy scenarios—the California Advanced Clean Truck (ACT) Rule, the NOx Omnibus Rule, and a '100 x 40 ZEV + Clean Grid' scenario—on the U.S. medium- and heavy-duty (M/HD) vehicle fleet. The framework integrates five analyses: fuel use and emissions, health impacts, economic and jobs effects, utility impacts, and infrastructure gaps. It utilizes tools such as the STate Emission Pathways (STEP) Tool, EPA's MOVES3 and COBRA, and IMPLAN software to quantify changes in greenhouse gases, criteria pollutants (NOx and PM), and macroeconomic metrics like GDP and employment. The report details specific assumptions regarding battery cost trajectories, charging infrastructure requirements, and the social cost of greenhouse gases to ensure a standardized approach for subsequent state-specific reports.

The report evaluates Colorado's emissions trajectory and proposes a '1.5°C Scenario' to bridge the gap between current policies and climate goals. This scenario emphasizes a rapid transition to 100% clean electricity by 2035, the electrification of transportation and buildings, and the reduction of industrial methane leaks. Implementing these measures is projected to reduce net emissions by 85% below business-as-usual levels by 2050, while creating up to 36,000 new jobs and providing significant public health benefits, including the prevention of over 1,400 deaths annually by 2050.

This executive summary outlines a strategic policy framework to accelerate the transition to clean, electrified transportation in the U.S. by 2035. It argues that achieving 100 percent EV sales by 2030-2035, paired with a 90 percent clean grid, would generate $2.7 trillion in consumer savings and avoid 150,000 premature deaths by 2050. The report prioritizes national fuel economy and tailpipe emissions standards, equity-focused programs for underserved communities, targeted consumer incentives, the expansion of charging infrastructure, and 'Made in America' policies to bolster domestic battery and EV manufacturing.

The report advocates for a U.S. federal Clean Electricity Standard (CES) targeting 80% clean power by 2030. It asserts that such a target is technologically feasible, affordable, and reliable, while providing significant co-benefits. Key arguments include the creation of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the avoidance of over $1.7 trillion in health costs through reduced air pollution, and the establishment of a foundation for 100% clean power by 2035. The document highlights that achieving this goal requires rapid infrastructure build-out, specifically approximately 95 GW of wind and solar annually, and emphasizes the need for federal policy to reduce siting and interconnection barriers.

The report argues that the OECD's Pillar Two (GloBE) proposal, which uses accounting profits to determine the Effective Tax Rate (ETR), fails to account for timing differences common in the mining sector, such as accelerated depreciation. This discrepancy could lead to 'top-up taxes' being paid to parent company jurisdictions rather than host countries, potentially reducing investment in developing nations. The document evaluates three policy solutions: loss carryforwards and income inclusion credits, deferred-tax accounting, and the use of local tax rules, while also addressing the challenges of permanent differences like tax holidays and stabilization clauses in mining contracts.

The report examines the physical and economic consequences of delaying climate action. It argues that because CO2 persists in the atmosphere and natural carbon sinks are saturating, stabilizing concentrations requires emissions to reach nearly zero. Delaying this transition increases the risk of nonlinear 'tipping points,' such as methane release from the Arctic, and leads to higher costs due to the need for more aggressive deployment of clean energy and the premature retirement of polluting assets. Using the Energy Policy Simulator for the U.S., the report finds that delaying action until 2030 increases the net present value of expenditures by 72% compared to starting in 2021.

The report evaluates three policy scenarios for transitioning New Jersey's medium- and heavy-duty (M/HD) vehicle fleet to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). The most ambitious scenario, '100 x 40 ZEV + Clean Grid', projects cumulative net societal benefits of over $21 billion by 2050, including 303 avoided premature deaths and 325 fewer hospital visits. While ZEVs currently have higher purchase costs, the analysis predicts lifetime cost parity with combustion vehicles by 2030. The transition is expected to generate national macroeconomic gains in GDP and higher-paying jobs in electrical manufacturing and infrastructure, although net job gains may reverse by 2045 due to reduced fuel and maintenance spending. Implementation would require significant investment in depot and public charging infrastructure, with the 100 x 40 ZEV scenario requiring an average of $73 million annually for depot charging and $46 million for public networks.

The report analyzes the transition of Washington's medium- and heavy-duty (M/HD) vehicle fleet to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) under three scenarios: the ACT Rule, the ACT + NOx Omnibus Rule, and a highly ambitious '100 x 40 ZEV + Clean Grid' scenario. The most aggressive scenario is projected to generate cumulative net societal benefits of over $42.8 billion by 2050, including significant reductions in premature deaths and greenhouse gas emissions. While ZEVs currently have higher purchase costs, the analysis predicts lifetime cost parity with combustion vehicles by 2030. The transition is expected to benefit electric utilities through increased revenue and potentially lower electricity rates for residential and commercial customers, while creating national job gains in electrical component manufacturing and infrastructure construction.

The Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) is a regional program designed to reduce carbon emissions from the transportation sector by limiting total emissions and requiring fuel distributors to pay into a fund. This fund could generate an estimated $68 billion over ten years for participating states, including Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia. The document highlights that rural residents, who drive more than 13,000 miles annually—over 20% above the regional average—stand to save up to twice as much per capita as urban residents by switching to electric vehicles (EVs). To support this transition, the author suggests higher purchase incentives for low- and moderate-income drivers, expanded rural charging infrastructure, and the growth of vanpools and paratransit services. Additionally, the document emphasizes the need for climate-resilient infrastructure, citing the damage caused by Tropical Storm Irene in Vermont as a precedent for the increasing intensity of storms in the region.

The Canadian Climate Institute presents a framework of 11 indicators divided into goals (low-carbon growth, economic resilience), catalysts (technology development, adoption, trade, and infrastructure), and fundamentals (low-carbon jobs, affordable energy, inclusive resilience, clean air, and flourishing ecosystems). The report finds that while Canada has decoupled GDP from emissions nationally, progress is uneven across provinces. It highlights significant data gaps, particularly regarding climate costs, social vulnerability, and ecosystem health, and recommends cross-governmental collaboration and improved data correlation to support a just transition.

The document advocates for the transition of the Southeast U.S. electricity sector from vertically integrated monopolies to a competitive wholesale market, potentially via a Regional Transmission Organization (RTO). It highlights that such a shift could save customers 29 percent on electricity costs and reduce emissions by 37 percent below 2018 levels by 2040. The authors suggest incremental steps, such as Energy Imbalance Markets (EIM) and all-source procurement, as pathways toward full restructuring. Additionally, the report emphasizes the need for integrated distribution planning for distributed energy resources and a 'just transition' framework to support communities affected by the phase-out of coal power.

The report finds that transitioning from the current vertically-integrated monopoly structure to a competitive RTO in the Southeast would generate approximately $384 billion in cumulative savings by 2040. This shift would lower retail electricity costs by 29% and reduce carbon emissions by 37% relative to 2018 levels. The analysis highlights that competition accelerates the deployment of wind, solar, and battery storage, creating a net increase of 285,000 jobs compared to the business-as-usual scenario. The study contrasts this with the current Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) approach, which it characterizes as inefficient due to excessive reserve margins and a reliance on uneconomic coal generation.

The report argues that rate-regulated utilities use 'self-commitment' to bypass market merit order, running coal plants that are objectively uneconomic and passing the resulting losses to captive customers through state fuel-cost-recovery processes. Using PLEXOS modeling for the MISO region in 2018, the authors find that this practice cost customers $350 million and suppressed regional market clearing prices by 2.4%. The report identifies Cleco and DTE Energy as significant contributors to these distortions and recommends that state regulators disallow the recovery of imprudent, above-market costs to incentivize efficient dispatch.

The document analyzes a proposed $0.25 per gallon federal gas tax increase, finding it would generate approximately $1.1 trillion in revenue through 2050 and reduce total fuel consumption by over 1.3 billion barrels. The tax would incentivize the adoption of electric vehicles, adding roughly 2.5 million additional EVs to U.S. roads by 2050. Additionally, the report notes that a $0.25 gas tax is equivalent to a carbon tax of $25 to $29 per ton, which exceeds the record high allowance auction prices of the California-Quebec and Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cap-and-trade systems.

The report finds that donors must double their current annual contributions to food security, adding 14 billion USD per year, while low- and middle-income countries must provide an additional 19 billion USD annually through taxes. These combined investments of 33 billion USD per year would prevent 490 million people from hunger and double the incomes of 545 million smallholders. The analysis emphasizes that Africa has the highest need for these funds and recommends a balanced investment strategy across three categories: enabling inclusion, on-farm productivity, and post-harvest food systems.

The report finds that achieving Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) targets by 2030 requires an additional 33 billion USD per year in public spending. This total is split between an additional 14 billion USD from international donors and 19 billion USD from low- and middle-income countries through increased taxation. These investments, focused heavily on Africa, would prevent 490 million people from suffering from hunger and double the incomes of 545 million small-scale producers while adhering to Paris Agreement climate commitments. The proposed funding is distributed across three intervention categories: empowering the excluded, on-farm productivity, and food movement.

The Ceres2030 report argues that a world without hunger is possible through a coordinated investment of 33 billion USD annually until 2030. Using AI-driven data synthesis and complex economic modeling, the project identifies ten key recommendations across three pillars: empowering the excluded, on-farm improvements, and food movement. The findings emphasize that integrated portfolios of interventions—combining technology with human capital, social protection, and market access—are more effective than isolated solutions. The report highlights Africa as the region with the greatest need and calls for a doubling of donor contributions to 26 billion USD per year, supplemented by increased domestic taxation in recipient countries.

The Ceres2030 project uses AI-driven evidence reviews and complex economic modeling to determine that an additional $33 billion in annual public spending—$14 billion from donors and $19 billion from low- and middle-income countries—is required to end hunger and double smallholder incomes by 2030 while adhering to Paris Agreement emissions targets. The report identifies ten key recommendations across three categories: empowering the excluded (e.g., farmer organizations, youth training, social protection), farm-level interventions (e.g., climate-resilient crops, extension services, livestock feed), and food flow improvements (e.g., reducing post-harvest losses, supporting SMEs). It emphasizes that integrated bundles of interventions are more effective than isolated solutions and highlights a critical lack of high-quality, gender-disaggregated, and cost-specific evidence in current agricultural research.

The report analyzes the potential for Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, India, Japan, and the United States to strengthen their mitigation targets to align with the Paris Agreement's temperature goals. It evaluates these potentials by examining socioeconomic data, historical emissions, current policy projections, global least-cost pathways using marginal abatement cost curves, and 'fair share' equity principles. The analysis also considers the political feasibility of deploying available low-carbon technologies and phasing out fossil fuel subsidies.