Search Climate Insights Directory

Superhot rock energy involves tapping into Earth's deep heat (400°C or hotter) to produce high-density, zero-carbon power. While current geothermal is limited to specific volcanic regions, superhot rock could be accessed worldwide through deep drilling. The report identifies critical engineering needs in drilling, reservoir creation, and materials, suggesting that leveraging unconventional oil and gas expertise could accelerate commercialization.

The document analyzes the global pipeline of coal-to-gas conversions, identifying approximately 89.6 GW of such projects in development. It argues that these projects risk locking in fossil fuel use for decades and creating stranded assets, especially as the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for renewables with storage becomes more competitive than gas. The report highlights East Asia, Europe, and North America as the regions with the most significant coal-to-gas activity and warns that methane leakage from gas infrastructure can make gas-fired power more damaging to the climate than coal if leakage exceeds 3%.

The report finds that global gas-fired power capacity in development (615 GW) now exceeds that of coal (457 GW), representing an estimated US$509 billion in capital expenditure. This expansion is described as ubiquitous across all continents, directly conflicting with the IEA's 1.5°C net-zero pathway. The authors argue that these investments face significant stranded asset risks as clean energy portfolios (CEPs) increasingly outcompete gas on cost, particularly in the US and Australia.

The report argues that South Africa does not need new gas-fired power generation until at least 2035, if ever, due to the falling costs of renewables and battery storage. It warns that current government momentum toward gas-to-power, including the RMI4P program and proposed LNG terminals, risks creating stranded assets and increasing electricity costs for consumers. The authors recommend a moratorium on gas-to-power development, focusing instead on rapid renewable deployment and energy efficiency.

The report finds that most of the 88+ GW of proposed US gas power plants are economically uncompetitive compared to Clean Energy Portfolios (CEPs), which combine wind, solar, storage, energy efficiency, and demand flexibility. At least 70 GW of proposed gas capacity could be avoided using CEPs, potentially saving $22 billion and reducing CO2 emissions by 873 million metric tons over 20 years. The analysis highlights six key headwinds—including declining renewable costs, rising gas prices, and public health impacts—that increase the risk of project cancellations or stranded assets. Specifically, in a central analysis case, 40% of proposed combined cycle (CC) plants would cost more to operate than a new CEP would cost to build within 10 years, a figure that could rise to 80-90% under certain economic scenarios. The report also notes that CEPs create more jobs and avoid significant health costs, particularly in low-income communities and communities of color.

Superhot rock (SHR) geothermal energy, defined as heat energy mined at temperatures of 400°C or hotter, is presented as a high-energy-density resource capable of providing competitive, dispatchable, zero-carbon power worldwide. While current geothermal capacity is limited to 15 GW in volcanic or thin-crust regions, SHR could potentially be accessed anywhere through super-deep drilling. The report estimates that mature SHR electricity could be competitive at $20-35 per MWh, producing five to ten times the energy per well compared to conventional systems. Realizing this potential requires overcoming engineering challenges in drilling (reaching 7-15 km), reservoir creation, and well metallurgy. The proposed path forward involves moving three to five pilot demonstrations forward in the next five years, transitioning from shallow hot dry rock to deep continental resources, and leveraging the expertise of the unconventional oil and gas industry to accelerate commercialization within 10 to 15 years.

The report identifies 27 GW of planned coal power plants in India as "zombie" assets that are superfluous to the country's electricity requirements for FY 2030. It argues that India can meet both aggregate and peak demand growth through its existing construction pipeline and the expansion of renewable energy (RE) and battery storage. The analysis suggests that cancelling these projects would save Rs. 247,421 crore in capital expenditure and potentially reduce annual power purchase costs by Rs. 43,219 crore. The report warns that building these plants would lock consumers into expensive contracts, create stranded assets, and jeopardize India's target of 450 GW of RE by 2030.

The report finds that a vast majority of U.S. coal capacity is now more expensive to operate than building new wind or solar power. As of 2020, 72% of coal capacity (166 GW) was deemed uneconomic or slated for retirement by 2025. The authors argue that this 'cost crossover' is accelerating due to rapid declines in renewable costs and falling coal capacity factors. The document recommends that policymakers implement all-source competitive procurement and coal asset securitization to transition to cleaner, cheaper energy portfolios while managing the financial risks of early plant retirement.

The briefing argues that India's rooftop solar sector faces significant investment barriers, including a lack of scale for debt financing and limited investor entry/exit options. It proposes Solar Investment Trusts (SEITs) as a vehicle to pool projects, diversify risk, and ensure transparency through SEBI regulation. The author estimates that SEITs could mobilize over USD 1 billion for rooftop solar within five years and reduce the cost of equity by 350-400 basis points, ultimately lowering the levelized cost of energy and increasing solar adoption.

The document argues that offshore wind is a critical resource for achieving zero-emissions targets due to plummeting costs and high capacity factors. It highlights the transition from fixed subsidies to competitive procurement in Europe as a model for cost reduction and notes that floating turbines could unlock 80 percent of global offshore potential. For the U.S., it recommends establishing procurement targets, creating an interstate transmission backbone, and converting tax credits to direct payments to accelerate deployment.

The report examines the procurement processes of vertically integrated utilities in the United States, highlighting how monopsony power and financial incentives often lead to the over-procurement of capacity and a bias toward self-built, gas-fired generation. Using Xcel Colorado as a model, the authors recommend five best practices for regulators: determining technology-neutral needs through resource planning, requiring competitive all-source bidding with robust evaluation, conducting advance review of procurement terms, ensuring utility ownership does not conflict with competitive bidding, and upholding rules for fairness and transparency. The report analyzes case studies from Colorado, New Mexico, Georgia, Minnesota, Indiana, Texas, California, Virginia, and North Carolina to illustrate the effectiveness of all-source RFPs in reducing costs and increasing renewable energy deployment.

The document advocates for the integration of advanced nuclear energy into a diversified zero-carbon energy portfolio to mitigate the risks and costs associated with relying solely on variable renewables. It highlights nuclear's advantages in power density, dispatchability, and its ability to produce carbon-free hydrogen for hard-to-electrify sectors. While acknowledging challenges such as high costs, waste disposal, and public perception, the author suggests that standardized construction, advanced reactor designs, and supportive federal policies—specifically the Nuclear Energy Leadership Act (NELA)—can make nuclear a scalable and cost-effective tool for climate mitigation.

The report analyzes how the GCC region and India achieved low solar energy prices through supportive policies, streamlined procurement, and reduced financing costs, contrasting these with Indonesia's challenges including high local content requirements and developer-borne infrastructure costs.

The report evaluates options for replacing Poland's Bełchatów Lignite Power Plant, concluding that a 'Coal Exit' strategy by 2035—replacing coal with renewables (RES) and gas—is more cost-efficient and beneficial for health and employment than maintaining current policies. The Coal Exit scenario is projected to reduce CO2 emissions by 38% and total system costs by €64 billion compared to the Reference scenario, while increasing total employment by 76%. Specifically, phasing out Bełchatów earlier contributes €4 billion to these savings and approximately 50 million tonnes to the overall CO2 reduction.

The report finds that a significant portion of the U.S. coal fleet is now more expensive to operate than replacing it with new local wind and solar power. In 2018, 74% of the fleet was 'at risk' of being undercut by renewables, a figure projected to rise to 86% by 2025. The analysis emphasizes that these findings are conservative because they only consider resources within 35 miles of existing plants and do not account for broader transmission expansion or combined energy portfolios.

The report identifies that the typical LCOE for well-run minigrids is at least $0.60 per kWh, which is too expensive for widespread use. It proposes six cost-reduction pathways—hardware standardization, demand stimulation, customer engagement, clustered project development, low-cost financing, and regulatory reform—to bring the LCOE down to $0.25 per kWh by 2020. The document also provides an investment roadmap to transition from grant funding to commercial debt.

The document analyzes how the rise of variable renewable energy (VRE) undermines current electricity market designs, which rely on short-term marginal costs often set by natural gas. It highlights risks such as zero or negative pricing and increased financing costs due to investor uncertainty. To resolve this, the authors propose splitting the system into an 'energy market' for long-term, low-risk contracts for capital-intensive resources and a 'delivery market' that uses locational marginal pricing to incentivize flexibility from batteries, demand response, and dispatchable plants.

The document addresses four perceived barriers to the clean energy transition: the 'duck curve' ramping problem, the necessity of curtailing excess generation, the high cost of renewables, and the role of natural gas in emissions reductions. It argues that demand response and battery storage can manage variability, regional electricity trading can prevent waste, and energy efficiency combined with falling technology costs keeps customer bills low. Finally, it asserts that renewable energy and energy efficiency have contributed more to U.S. carbon emission declines since 2007 than the shift to natural gas.

The Bujagali Hydropower Project in Uganda serves as a case study for the use of combined risk mitigation instruments—specifically the International Development Association's (IDA) partial risk guarantee (PRG) and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency's (MIGA) political risk insurance (PRI)—to attract private capital in high-risk environments. The project mobilized nearly $300 million in commercial loans and private equity, achieving a ratio of almost one U.S. dollar of private capital for every two U.S. dollars of public financing. These instruments enabled commercial banks to offer loans with maturities of 16 years and lower interest rates, which reduced the required initial electricity tariff by between 7% and 60%. The resulting levelized cost of energy (LCOE) was approximately 107 USD/MWh, significantly lower than the cost of the emergency thermal power it replaced. While effective, such complex structures have been underutilized due to high transaction costs and restrictive DFI policies, though recent World Bank Group modernizations aim to expand these tools to smaller-scale renewable energy projects like solar and wind.

The document examines the challenges and opportunities for geothermal energy in Indonesia, highlighting the Sarulla Geothermal Power Plant as a model for private sector involvement. It argues that while Indonesia has the world's largest geothermal potential (29GW), utilization remains below 5% due to regulatory hurdles, funding gaps, and high exploration risks. The Sarulla project, with a planned 330MW capacity, demonstrates how proven resources, public guarantees, and long-term feed-in tariffs can attract private investment and lower costs. The report concludes that public finance should be strategically focused on the high-risk exploration and field development phases to meet Indonesia's 2025 target of 7.6GW installed capacity.