Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) on the U.S. building sector, highlighting its potential to reduce annual emissions by 32 to 33 million metric tons of CO2e by 2030. It details various residential rebates (HEEHRA, HOMES), tax credits (25C, 25D, 45L), and commercial incentives (179D), while emphasizing that these must be paired with stricter appliance standards and updated building codes to overcome slow stock turnover. The document provides specific implementation guidance for State Energy Offices and utility regulators to ensure an equitable transition, particularly for low-to-moderate-income households.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 represents the largest congressional action to date on climate change, allocating nearly $370 billion toward disadvantaged communities and clean energy. It introduces technology-neutral tax credits starting in 2025, a 10-year runway for energy incentives, and significant funding for domestic manufacturing of solar, wind, and batteries. Rhodium Group modeling suggests the IRA could increase U.S. greenhouse gas reductions to 31%-44% by 2030, potentially meeting the U.S. nationally determined contribution when combined with other agency and local actions. The law also establishes the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and provides incentives for electric vehicle adoption, though domestic content requirements may affect the scale of EV growth.

The guide outlines how nonprofits can overcome the barrier of upfront costs for energy efficiency projects by utilizing a combination of utility rebates, state and federal incentives, internal funds, and third-party financing. It highlights specific tools for calculating savings and identifying incentives, such as the DOE's Asset Score and the DSIRE database, and suggests innovative financing models like PACE and on-bill financing for larger-scale building improvements.

The document outlines the financial landscape for electric school bus (ESB) adoption in the US, noting that while ESBs can cost up to three times more than diesel buses upfront, they offer significant lifetime operational savings. It details various funding mechanisms—including grants, rebates, vouchers, and loans—and identifies specific funding sources from the federal government (such as the IIJA), state programs (like California's HVIP), and local utilities or air quality districts. The guide also emphasizes the role of financing and 'stacking' multiple funding streams to make electrification viable for school districts.

The policy brief examines how African pension funds can bridge the renewable energy investment gap in sub-Saharan Africa. It proposes the use of 'renewable energy-backed' (RE) bonds to align long-term pension obligations with energy infrastructure projects, reducing reliance on foreign currency and mitigating exchange risks. The author identifies a significant funding gap, noting that Africa requires approximately $70 billion in annual renewable energy investment until 2030, while actual investment in sub-Saharan Africa was only $10 billion in 2018 and $30 billion in 2019. To unlock this potential, the document recommends the creation of green banks to coordinate finance, the implementation of government-backed guarantee schemes to lower risk perceptions for regulators, and the removal of fossil fuel subsidies to improve the competitiveness of clean energy.

The report outlines 30 federal policy recommendations to improve coastal resilience in the United States, emphasizing community-led planning, nature-based solutions, and equitable financing. It argues that federal policies must shift from relying on past climate data to anticipating future conditions, particularly for infrastructure and land use. Key priorities include integrating climate justice, supporting tribal sovereignty in adaptation planning, and reforming benefit-cost analysis tools to better value social and environmental outcomes. The document also advocates for the creation of a national 'green bank' and a federal climate heritage coordination office to manage the intersection of cultural preservation and climate change.

RMI proposes a green stimulus strategy for the United States focused on four pillars: a national building retrofit program, the electrification and diversification of mobility, debt forgiveness linked to emissions reductions, and the creation of a federal Economic Recovery Facility to finance clean projects.

Green banks are public or quasi-public entities designed to leverage public funds to attract private capital for low-carbon, climate-resilient investments. They address market gaps by reducing perceived risks for private investors through innovative financial tools, helping countries implement their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Examples include the UK Green Investment Bank, which leveraged £4 of private investment for every £1 of public funds, and Australia's Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which has invested in over 110 transactions to avoid an estimated 190 million tons of CO2.

The authors argue that innovative financing is essential to leverage grants and tax incentives for clean energy projects, particularly for low- and moderate-income individuals and small businesses. They specifically advocate for on-bill financing, which allows borrowers to repay energy efficiency and renewable energy costs via utility bills, noting its success in rural areas and specific states. The letter requests increased funding for the USDA's Rural Energy Savings Program and DOE's State Energy Program, and authorization for on-bill financing within the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant and state or local 'green banks'.

The document details Hawaii's approach to climate resilience through the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority (HGIA), highlighting its use of non-traditional underwriting to democratize clean energy for low-income residents and renters. It discusses specific projects, such as the Kahauiki Village microgrid and the Kahuku Point coastal restoration, as models for combining mitigation and adaptation. The briefing also argues for the National Climate Bank Act to scale these models federally, noting that while mitigation is easier to finance due to cash flows, adaptation requires more innovative financial structures to address unpriced positive externalities.

The paper argues that well-designed on-bill financing programs remove financial barriers for low- and moderate-income (LMI) households by eliminating upfront costs and using utility payment history instead of credit scores for underwriting. It highlights that tying financing obligations to the utility meter rather than the individual allows renters and subsequent homeowners to benefit from upgrades, solving the 'split incentive' problem. The author presents two case studies: the Hawaii Green Energy Money Saver (GEM$) program, which focuses on solar PV and energy efficiency, and the Orcas Power and Light Cooperative (OPALCO) Switch It Up! program, which emphasizes beneficial electrification. Both programs report zero defaults in their first year of operation, demonstrating the viability of alternative underwriting and the use of loan loss reserves to manage risk.

The GCF's Private Sector Facility (PSF) aims to green the financial systems of developing countries by addressing capacity, market, and policy barriers. The GCF utilizes three primary pillars: providing concessional financing and project preparation grants, implementing policy-level interventions through its Readiness Programme, and conducting outreach through partnerships with global networks. The document highlights the critical role of central banks as regulators and the importance of local financial institutions (LFIs) in reaching micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) and households. Case studies from Mongolia, Ghana, and West Africa demonstrate the use of on-lending models and risk-sharing instruments to scale up renewable energy and climate-resilient agriculture.

The report outlines key barriers and opportunities in scaling climate finance, emphasizing the need for development finance institutions (DFIs) to increase risk appetite and for the financial system to shift from risk disclosure to incentive-driven action. It highlights the importance of blended finance, sustainable land use, and urban infrastructure frameworks to achieve net-zero emissions by midcentury.

The report outlines strategies to expand green finance by improving climate risk disclosure, streamlining international finance architecture to better support national and subnational levels, and utilizing innovative financial instruments to mobilize private capital. It emphasizes the critical need for bankable project pipelines, particularly for cities and conservation projects, and the importance of standardized data to align investment with the Paris Agreement and NDCs.

The document details a spreadsheet model designed to quantify the effects of hypothetical green banks in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont from 2017 to 2031. It outlines the financial assumptions, including initial capitalization based on New York's per-capita rates, a 5% borrower interest rate, and a 5:1 private-sector leverage ratio. The methodology explains how funds are allocated across energy efficiency, solar photovoltaics, and community wind, and how these investments are translated into installed capacity, electricity savings, and avoided carbon emissions using data from NREL, ACEEE, and the EPA.

The Union of Concerned Scientists proposes that Maine establish a green bank to catalyze private-sector investment in clean energy. An analysis suggests that an initial public capitalization of $14 million could leverage $300 million in total investment over 15 years. This initiative would support 70 MW of new solar and wind capacity, save homes and businesses $33 million annually on electricity bills through efficiency, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 176,000 tons by 2031. The document identifies Efficiency Maine, the Finance Authority of Maine, and the Maine Technology Institute as potential hosts for the bank and outlines financial tools such as credit enhancements, warehousing, and direct lending to drive market transformation.

The Union of Concerned Scientists proposes that New Hampshire establish a clean energy finance authority to leverage public funds for private investment. An analysis suggests that an initial $14 million capitalization could drive $300 million in total investment over 15 years, resulting in 70 MW of new solar and wind capacity, $40.3 million in annual electricity bill savings, and a reduction of 222,900 tons of carbon dioxide emissions by 2031.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) proposes that Vermont could leverage an initial $7 million public investment into $148 million of total clean energy investment over 15 years. This expanded financing capacity would support nearly 50 MW of new solar and wind power, save homes and businesses $14.6 million annually on electricity bills, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by over 111,500 tons by 2031. The report details existing Vermont programs—such as Efficiency Vermont, PACE financing, and the Clean Energy Development Fund—and suggests a more comprehensive, coordinated public-private financing initiative to meet the state's long-term goal of 90% renewable energy and efficiency by 2050.

The document outlines the growing demand for sustainable finance professionals to facilitate the transition to a sustainable economy. It identifies diverse career paths in the public sector (multilateral development banks, green banks), the private sector (consulting, financial institutions, clean tech), and NGOs (foundations, thought leadership organizations). It notes that while finance backgrounds are advantageous, the field welcomes professionals from law, policy, and management, and highlights recent initiatives like the Breakthrough Energy Coalition and the Catalytic Finance Initiative as evidence of the sector's growth.

The report outlines a systematic approach to identifying and addressing financial barriers to low-carbon investment. It proposes an analysis matrix that intersects various financial stakeholders with specific barriers—such as high cost of capital, perceived risk, and split incentives—to determine where public intervention is most effective. The authors argue that dedicated institutions like green banks can be advantageous by co-housing policies to allow for flexible funding, creating a 'brain trust' of expertise, and simplifying access for consumers. The document also provides a table of existing public green infrastructure banks in the OECD, including examples from Australia, the UK, Korea, Canada, and the USA.