Search Climate Insights Directory

The document asserts that the United States lacks a centralized plan to manage the reliable transition of its electricity sector, noting that current decarbonization targets are set without sufficient coordination to ensure grid reliability. It argues that market-based mechanisms, such as Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs) and Energy Imbalance Markets (EIMs), are insufficient on their own to incentivize the specific generation resources needed for both resource adequacy and operating reliability. The author highlights that while New York and California are beginning to explore reliability-informed planning, a broader alignment between state policymakers, regulators, and grid operators is necessary to prevent reliability risks as fossil-fuel resources are retired.

The report asserts that the EPA's proposed rules for coal and gas power plants are technically feasible and will not threaten resource adequacy or operational reliability. It synthesizes six industry-standard studies showing that the U.S. grid can remain stable even if all unabated coal is retired by 2035. The authors argue that reliability risks are institutional rather than technical, stemming from slow interconnection processes and inadequate transmission planning. To manage the transition, the report recommends adopting 'connect-and-manage' interconnection processes, deploying grid-enhancing technologies, and proactively planning transmission for coal retirements.

The report finds that 99% of U.S. coal plants are more expensive to operate than to replace with new renewable energy. It highlights that local solar and wind resources, bolstered by IRA tax credits and the ability to reuse existing grid interconnections, offer a cost-effective path for coal retirement. The analysis suggests that the savings from this transition could fund 137 GW of four-hour battery storage to maintain grid reliability. The authors recommend that policymakers update resource plans, improve interconnection processes, and utilize IRA financing to ensure a just economic transition for coal-dependent communities.

The document argues that current US electricity market designs—including energy-only, capacity, and hybrid models—fail to support the rapid deployment of variable renewable energy (VRE) because they lack a functional 'energy markets cascade' that connects long-term investment to real-time pricing. To resolve this, the author proposes Organized Long-Term Markets (OLTMs), which would standardize long-term energy delivery contracts, increase liquidity and transparency, and allow for the optimization of diversified resource portfolios. The paper details the design of OLTMs, including the roles of producers, consumers, and facilitators, and applies the concept to the specific challenges faced by ERCOT, CAISO, and ISO New England.

The study finds that California can reliably meet an 85% clean electricity target by 2030 using portfolios primarily composed of wind, solar, and battery storage. Through 264 PLEXOS simulations, the authors tested three portfolios—Base Case, Diverse Clean Resources, and High Electrification—against stressors including gas and coal retirements, low hydro availability, and extreme weather. Results indicate the system remains robust even under simultaneous stressors, though it remains dependent on a strategic amount of in-state natural gas and economic imports. The report emphasizes that diversifying resources with offshore wind and geothermal reduces the need for solar and storage and improves grid stability by lowering instantaneous inverter-based generation. While demand flexibility can offset some storage needs, the study concludes that further nodal transmission and grid stability analyses are required for a complete reliability assessment.

The policy brief examines how the shift toward variable renewable energy and distributed energy resources (DERs) challenges traditional grid planning paradigms. It argues that the historical reliance on the Planning Reserve Margin (PRM) heuristic is increasingly inadequate for ensuring reliability in a high-renewables system. Furthermore, it warns that fossil fuel incumbents are exploiting these planning uncertainties to protect their market share by framing technical challenges as insurmountable barriers to decarbonization.

ClientEarth challenges the planned Belgian capacity mechanism (Planned CM), asserting that it lacks a complete design and fails to demonstrate a genuine resource adequacy concern. The organisation argues that the scheme would unfairly favour gas capacity, contradicting EU objectives to phase out environmentally harmful subsidies and hindering decarbonisation. It further contends that the Belgian electricity market's resilience and the availability of less distortive alternatives, such as strategic reserves and market reforms, render a market-wide capacity mechanism unnecessary. ClientEarth also warns that the Planned CM could strengthen the market dominance of existing oligopolistic players and lacks sufficient preference mechanisms for low-carbon resources.

ClientEarth argues that Greece's proposed extension of its flexibility and interruptibility schemes is unjustified because a recent resource adequacy assessment indicates no supply concerns for 2020-2030. The organization contends that these schemes act as a disincentive for Greece to implement the 'Target Model' market reforms and may violate the recast Electricity Market Regulation (EMR), which positions such measures as a 'last resort'. ClientEarth highlights that the interruptibility scheme disproportionately impacts solar power producers through its levy formula and notes ongoing legal challenges against both schemes in the Greek Council of State.

The South African energy services market, comprising small-scale embedded generation (SSEG), energy storage, and energy efficiency, is projected to reach a total available market value of approximately R125 billion by 2035. Growth is driven by rising Eskom electricity tariffs, falling costs of renewable technologies, and supportive regulatory shifts, such as the unbundling of Eskom and the 2019 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). Key emerging opportunities include the bundling of rooftop solar PV projects to attract larger investors, solar PV for energy resellers in property developments, and the retrofitting of existing buildings for energy efficiency. While the C&I sector currently dominates solar installations, the energy storage market is expected to grow significantly through grid management and resource adequacy applications, potentially valued between R15 billion and R30 billion by 2030.

ClientEarth argues that the proposed reductions in the capacity mechanism levy for energy-intensive users (EIUs) in Poland would undermine the security of supply objectives of the capacity market by dis-incentivising demand-side response. The organisation highlights that the scheme's costs would be shifted to households and non-EIU consumers, potentially affecting public acceptance. ClientEarth suggests that a fixed annual compensation would be a more adequate form of aid to maintain incentives for shifting consumption away from peak hours. The document also questions the expansion of the beneficiary pool from 52 to 300-350 EIUs and recommends that the Commission reject the scheme to avoid distorting the energy market.

The document defines 'resource adequacy' as the availability of all necessary resources—including generation, demand-side resources, and interconnection—to meet electricity demand. It outlines how RAAs can be used by campaigners to argue against the need for coal or gas plants and to challenge the legality of capacity mechanisms. It contrasts the limited, non-binding RAA rules of the 2009 Third Energy Package with the more legally binding framework introduced by the recast Electricity Regulation from 2020, which requires the consideration of interconnection and regional adequacy.

ClientEarth criticizes the UK government's proposal to continue operating parts of the Capacity Market (CM) during a European Commission (EC) State aid investigation. The organization argues that the government has not provided sufficient information on the legal and commercial risks if the EC rejects the scheme. ClientEarth highlights evidence from Ofgem suggesting that the UK's security of supply has been maintained at a higher cost to consumers than necessary due to overestimated capacity gaps. The response calls for a fundamental reassessment of whether the CM is still justified, urging a transition toward a technology-neutral, low-carbon energy system that prioritizes demand-side response and storage over long-term contracts for conventional generators.

ClientEarth argues that the UK's Capacity Market (CM) may be over-procuring capacity and risks subsidising fossil fuels, thereby undermining the coal phase-out and the Paris Agreement. The organisation recommends making Emissions Performance Standard (EPS) and LCP BREF compliance mandatory for CM entry, removing very long-term contracts to prevent fossil-fuel lock-in, and reducing financial barriers for demand-side response (DSR) and storage. It further suggests introducing a specific 'climate and competition' objective for the CM and reforming the cost-recovery methodology to provide sharper price signals for DSR. ClientEarth also calls for an independent resource adequacy assessment that accounts for the growth of distributed energy resources and interconnection.

The report evaluates the US coal fleet's economic viability against alternatives like natural gas and renewables, finding that 38% of the 2016 fleet faces an uncertain near-term future due to being either uneconomic or announced for retirement. It also estimates that emissions reductions from 2008 to 2016 provided $250 billion in public health and climate benefits. A proximity analysis indicates that while many coal plants are located in low-income and minority communities, the demographic distribution of the fleet has not changed significantly during the transition.

The document analyzes the challenges that high levels of variable renewable energy (VRE) pose to current restructured wholesale electricity markets, specifically regarding the erosion of the price-duration curve's central gradient used for long-term cost recovery. It proposes two future market paths: one continuing to rely on spot markets enhanced by demand elasticity and storage, and another 'bifurcated' model that separates a long-term 'firm market' for capital-heavy assets from a residual spot market for real-time balancing.

The report analyzes how battery energy storage can provide thirteen different services across three grid levels: transmission, distribution, and behind-the-meter. It argues that while single-use batteries are often underutilized and economically unviable, 'stacking' multiple services—such as combining demand charge reduction with wholesale grid services—can make storage a cash-positive investment. Through four U.S. case studies, the report demonstrates that behind-the-meter systems are technically capable of providing the widest array of services, though significant regulatory barriers currently hinder this potential.

The Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP) and ClientEarth contend that the UK government (DECC), National Grid, and Ofgem have underestimated available resources, leading to an exaggerated resource adequacy problem. They argue that treating interconnectors as generation would add at least 2.6 GW of capacity and that conventional generation availability is likely in the mid to low 90% range. Consequently, the authors claim the market-wide capacity mechanism is unnecessary, risks over-procuring national resources, undermines EU interconnectivity goals, and may not comply with state aid requirements of necessity and proportionality.

The document maps the EU's power system planning, detailing five primary workstreams: national and European grid needs, European and national capacity sufficiency, and system flexibility. It identifies the roles of key actors such as TSOs, ENTSO-E, ACER, and the European Commission, and specifies the frequency and purpose of core assessments like the Ten-Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP) and Resource Adequacy Assessments (NRAA and ERAA).

The report finds that achieving an 80% non-fossil electricity share by 2035 is technically feasible and would lower wholesale electricity costs compared to current policy trajectories. This transition would be driven by the declining costs of wind, solar, and battery storage, which the authors argue are now more cost-effective than new coal generation. The 'Clean Energy' scenario would significantly reduce CO2 emissions and premature deaths from air pollution, while resulting in a net increase in employment, despite losses in the coal mining sector. Reliability analysis suggests the system can maintain a 10% operating reserve margin even with high variable renewable penetration and the retirement of 250 to 300 GW of coal capacity.

The document addresses the recent surge in U.S. electricity demand driven by data centers, manufacturing, and electric vehicles. It warns that utilities are defaulting to new gas plants, which risks creating stranded assets and conflicting with climate goals. The authors propose a portfolio of alternatives, including aggressive energy efficiency, the reuse of fossil fuel interconnection sites for renewables, demand response with large customers, and grid-enhancing technologies to improve existing transmission infrastructure.