Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that the Trump administration has systematically eroded the role of science in federal policymaking through the appointment of conflicted officials, the removal of scientific data from government websites, and the rollback of science-based public health and environmental protections. It highlights specific actions, such as the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the delay of methane emission standards, as evidence of a strategy to prioritize industry profits over public safety. The document concludes with recommendations for scientists, Congress, and the media to defend scientific integrity.

The author contends that while advanced nuclear technologies could provide carbon-free electricity to meet skyrocketing global demand, their deployment is hindered by outdated regulatory frameworks. Specifically, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's current processes are designed for traditional light water reactors and fail to account for the unique features of new designs, creating financial risks for private investors. The text asserts that updating these pathways is essential for achieving long-term climate goals and meeting the energy needs of the developing world.

The author calls for a large turnout at the 2017 Peoples Climate March in Washington, D.C., to signal that Americans still care about climate change despite the political climate of the Trump administration. The text highlights the 2014 march as a catalyst for previous U.S. climate actions, such as the Clean Power Plan and the Paris agreement, and emphasizes the need for solidarity and systemic political accountability to protect the planet.

The document analyzes proposed budget cuts in the FY2018 'skinny' budget, highlighting the elimination of bipartisan programs for low-income energy assistance, climate research, and rural transportation. It details specific reductions across the USDA, DOE, EPA, NASA, and the Department of State, arguing that the 'America First' approach prioritizes physical security and fossil fuels over climate resilience and international cooperation.

The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) has emerged as a leader in renewable energy, offering significant opportunities for corporate buyers through wind power purchase agreements (PPAs). Market improvements since 2014, including the integration of the Integrated System (IS) transmission system, have increased dispatch efficiency and reduced energy costs. The region possesses some of the highest wind resource quality in the U.S., with nine of the top 10 states for high-capacity-factor wind generation located within the SPP footprint. This high capacity factor allows for lower unit costs and more competitive PPA prices. While there is a strong pipeline of planned wind capacity—including an estimated 19 GW of planned additions and nearly 7 GW expected in 2017—corporate buyers are cautioned to monitor the pace of transmission infrastructure investment to avoid curtailment risks and track regional policy changes, such as potential tax credit eliminations in Oklahoma.

The Clean Air Task Force asserts that President Trump's Executive Order to rescind the Climate Action Plan and related rules cannot be implemented by 'administrative fiat' due to the requirement for notice and comment rulemaking. The author argues that the Clean Power Plan is a cost-effective method for reducing emissions from power plants and that curbing methane emissions from the oil and gas industry is essential for public health and the climate, noting that methane is '70 times as potent a warmer as CO2' over its first 20 years.

The We Mean Business coalition criticizes a US Executive Order that undermines the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and the broader clean energy agenda. The coalition argues that the CPP provides significant economic benefits, including estimated net economic gains of US$26-45 billion and support for over 3 million jobs in 2016. Despite the policy shift, the coalition asserts that the transition to low-carbon energy is inevitable, citing support from over 1,000 companies and investors via the 'Business Backs Low Carbon USA' statement and the continued global commitment to the Paris Agreement.

The World Resources Institute argues that President Trump's Executive Order undermines U.S. public health, economic competitiveness, and global leadership by rolling back methane regulations, coal leasing limits, and the Clean Power Plan.

The report analyzes the climate impact of electric vehicles (EVs) based on the electricity sources used for charging across different U.S. regions. It finds that while EVs generally produce fewer emissions than gasoline cars, their full potential depends on decarbonizing the power grid by shifting from coal and natural gas to renewable energy. The document also highlights the inherent efficiency of electric drive and the synergistic potential between EVs and renewable energy integration.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is conducting a comprehensive review of the Federal coal program via a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). This scoping report identifies key areas for reform, including increasing royalty rates to ensure fair market value, accounting for greenhouse gas emissions through carbon budgets or royalty adders, and improving lease process efficiency. The document summarizes extensive public input and proposes several combination packages of policy options to be analyzed in the Draft PEIS, alongside 'no action' and 'no leasing' alternatives.

The paper analyzes four prominent studies of the Clean Power Plan (CPP)—conducted by the EPA, NERA Economic Consulting, Synapse Energy Economics, and M.J. Bradley & Associates—to explain why they produce conflicting results regarding electricity bills. By comparing these studies against a range of independent expert forecasts and empirical data, the authors find a strong correlation between the optimism or pessimism of a study's underlying assumptions and its final economic conclusions. Specifically, studies assuming higher costs for solar and wind power and less interstate cooperation tend to project higher compliance costs, while those assuming rapid technological progress and high energy efficiency savings project lower costs or even decreases in electricity bills.

The US coal industry has faced a sharp decline driven by the shale gas revolution, increasing competitiveness of renewables, and federal environmental regulations. This transition has led to significant job losses and bankruptcies among major coal producers, particularly impacting regions like Appalachia and the Powder River Basin. To mitigate these effects, the Obama administration introduced the Power Plus Plan to fund economic diversification and worker retraining. However, low-income households still face high electricity costs, and bankrupt companies have shifted reclamation and pension liabilities to state budgets.

Friends of the Earth outlines the potential conflicts of interest and environmental risks associated with Rex Tillerson becoming U.S. Secretary of State, citing ExxonMobil's history of funding climate denial and Tillerson's interests in Arctic drilling and the Keystone XL pipeline.

The statement asserts that the shift toward renewable energy is an economic inevitability, citing corporate commitments from companies like Walmart and General Mills and the cost-competitiveness of wind and solar power over fossil fuels in various global regions. It emphasizes that the drive to decarbonize the US energy economy will persist through the actions of states, cities, and businesses, and calls for bipartisan cooperation to protect climate policies like the Clean Power Plan.

The report evaluates the climate risk disclosure practices of several major fossil fuel companies, including Arch Coal, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, CONSOL Energy, ExxonMobil, Peabody Energy, and Royal Dutch Shell. It scores companies across four categories: regulatory risks, physical risks, market/indirect risks, and corporate governance. While most companies provide detailed analysis of regulatory risks, the report finds widespread failures in disclosing the specific role of climate change in physical risks and a near-total absence of disclosure regarding corporate governance on climate issues.

The report evaluates the climate policy engagement of several major fossil fuel companies, including BP, Shell, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Arch Coal, CONSOL Energy, and Peabody Energy. It uses a scoring system to measure their support for federal carbon reduction policies, their responses to the EPA Clean Power Plan and Methane Rule, and their participation in climate-supportive business alliances. Findings range from 'Good' scores for companies like BP, which supports carbon pricing and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, to 'Poor' or 'Egregious' scores for companies like Peabody Energy, which the report claims used climate science disinformation to oppose the Clean Power Plan.

The Union of Concerned Scientists developed a scorecard to assess eight major fossil fuel companies—including Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips, Peabody Energy, CONSOL Energy, and Arch Coal—on their climate responsibility. The methodology employs 30 metrics across four areas: renouncing disinformation, planning for a carbon-free world, supporting effective climate policies, and disclosing climate risks. The assessment focuses on the period from January 2015 to May 2016, utilizing public filings, corporate reports, and third-party data. Notably, the document states that no assessed companies met the standard required to be scored on the execution of their carbon-reduction plans.

The We Mean Business Coalition advocates for the implementation of the U.S. Clean Power Plan, stating it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 and save consumers US$155 billion between 2020 and 2030. The author contends that the plan is supported by the private sector because it removes barriers to scaling clean energy and reduces business risk, countering claims that the policy would harm the economy.

The document defends the Clean Power Plan against claims that the EPA overstepped its authority. It asserts that the Plan adheres to the limits of Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, which requires the agency to avoid excessive costs, consider energy supply impacts, and use adequately demonstrated reduction techniques.

Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica calls on 750,000 supporters to vote for candidates who prioritize environmental values. He argues that an environmental majority in the US government is necessary to repeal fossil fuel and nuclear subsidies, protect pollinators from chemicals, and uphold the Clean Power Plan.