Search Climate Insights Directory

The report evaluates Hawai`i County's goals across ten areas, including affordable housing, energy self-sufficiency, and environmental stewardship. It argues that the loss of local land control to outside investors is the island's most critical challenge, driving a housing crisis and eroding the social fabric (ohana). RMI recommends implementing land trusts, deed restrictions, and green building standards to ensure permanent affordability. The document emphasizes 'whole-system thinking' to address root causes rather than symptoms, suggesting that the county maximize its local economic multiplier by producing energy and food locally. A significant portion of the report is dedicated to proposing specific indicators to measure progress toward these goals to ensure transparency and durability.

The report assesses the first decade of GM crop commercialization, focusing on soy, maize, cotton, and rapeseed. It argues that the promised benefits—such as increased yields and reduced pesticide use—are largely myths. In the US, it notes that GM crops have not increased potential yields and have actually increased overall agrochemical use. In South America, specifically Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay, the expansion of GM soy is linked to deforestation and increased pesticide use, with GM varieties showing higher susceptibility to drought than conventional ones. In Asia and Africa, the report highlights the failure of Bt cotton in China, India, and Indonesia, citing the emergence of secondary pests and increased farmer indebtedness. It concludes that the primary beneficiary of this technology is Monsanto, which has consolidated control over the global seed market, while small farmers face increased dependency and economic risk.

The document identifies several trade policy levers to address climate change, including the liberalization of trade in low-emission goods, the reinstatement of subsidies for greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction, the removal of domestic barriers to clean energy investment, the relaxation of intellectual property rights for green technologies, and the reduction of fossil fuel subsidies. It emphasizes that trade policy must be part of a broader suite of complementary fiscal and regulatory measures and suggests that while the WTO is the primary venue for multilateral action, plurilateral or regional agreements may serve as alternatives.

The document is a series of exchange entries between Amory Lovins, Peter Bradford, and R. Stephen Berry. Lovins argues that nuclear power is a 'market loser' and that 'negawatts' (energy efficiency) and micropower are faster, cheaper, and more effective climate solutions. Bradford supports this view, highlighting the high financial risks, the need for massive taxpayer subsidies, and proliferation concerns. Conversely, Berry argues that energy efficiency alone cannot meet the growing energy demands of developing nations like China and India, and that nuclear power is a necessary, reliable, and potentially cost-competitive option if carbon costs are internalized.

The text posits that energy efficiency investments are irreversible and more cost-effective than purchasing oil. It highlights the potential for ultralight materials, plug-in hybrids, and biofuels to drastically reduce oil consumption, suggesting that the US could eliminate its oil use by the 2040s at a cost of $15 per barrel. The author emphasizes the role of corporate strategy (e.g., Wal-Mart, Boeing, Ford) and the US Pentagon in driving these technological leaps to enhance economic profitability and national security.

The IAI report details the successful implementation of the CRN-II program and the closure of CRN-I, alongside new funding from the NSF for human dimensions research. It highlights expanded institutional cooperation with entities like RIOCC, CYTED, and IICA, and the organization of several workshops on climate-land use interfaces and disaster risk management. Administratively, the IAI appointed a new Financial and Administrative Officer and is transitioning its Data and Information System to open-source software. Financially, as of November 2006, only 6% of approved member contributions had been collected, though the institute expects to reach 90% for the 2006/2007 period.

The author contends that climate solutions are profitable rather than costly, as saving fuel is cheaper than purchasing it. By increasing global energy productivity to approximately 3% per year and removing market barriers to energy efficiency, carbon emissions can be stabilized. The text highlights 'micropower' and 'negawatts' as economically superior alternatives to nuclear power and traditional centralized electricity, suggesting that a transition away from oil and toward a diverse, renewable system is driven by business logic and market forces.

The report analyzes the extensive network of U.S. government subsidies for liquid biofuels, finding that support is pervasive across the entire supply chain. It estimates that annualized subsidies for ethanol range between $6.3 and $8.7 billion, while biodiesel support ranges from $1.7 to $2.3 billion. The author argues that these subsidies are often inefficient, particularly in terms of greenhouse gas mitigation and fossil fuel displacement, and warns that the rapid growth of the industry—driven by these incentives—may be unsustainable.

The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) outlines immediate strategies to lower U.S. crude oil demand, arguing that a 5% to 9% reduction would remove 1.0 to 1.8 million barrels per day from the global market. Proposed measures include reducing speed limits for non-Class 8 vehicles to 60 MPH, increasing the federal Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) for trucks to 110,000 lbs, and mandating Auxiliary Power Units (APUs) for new Class 8 tractors. RMI suggests these actions, combined with increased biofuel procurement and the adoption of 'total-flex' vehicle technology, would restore global excess capacity to 2.5 to 3.8 million barrels per day, thereby reducing price volatility.

The document examines the ongoing WTO negotiations on environmental goods, noting that current proposed lists of goods for liberalization primarily benefit developed countries, who account for 79 per cent of exports. To create a more balanced outcome, the author suggests expanding the definition of environmental goods to include environmentally preferable products (EPPs) of export interest to developing countries—specifically non-timber forest products and natural fibre products—and implementing Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) provisions such as delayed compliance and less-than-full reciprocity.

AESR and SGR argue for more aggressive domestic emission reductions in the UK, specifically targeting the transport sector through higher fuel duties and a renewable transport fuels obligation. They advocate for redirecting military R&D funding toward sustainable energy, implementing mandatory energy-efficiency ratings for home sales, and expanding the Emissions Trading Scheme to non-energy intensive sectors. The response emphasizes the need for a highly trained workforce for micro-CHP installation and warns against ocean-based carbon storage due to environmental risks.

The report identifies five critically stressed ecosystem services in Mauritania: biodiversity maintenance, food and fibre provision, water supply and regulation, fuel provision, and carbon sequestration. These stresses directly impact human well-being, specifically the ability to be adequately nourished, access clean water, obtain energy for cooking and warmth, and earn a livelihood. The analysis highlights that while all regions are affected, Assaba, Gorgol, and Guidimaka are high-priority areas due to the combination of stressed services, threatened well-being, and higher population density. Key drivers of degradation include prolonged droughts, over-grazing, over-hunting, and poorly planned infrastructure like the Diama dam.

The report argues that California can significantly reduce its global warming impact by mandating the adoption of existing and near-term vehicle technologies. Modeling shows that currently available improvements in engines, transmissions, and air conditioning could reduce fleet average heat-trapping emissions by 20%, while advanced technologies available within five years could achieve a 40% reduction. These improvements are presented as cost-effective, with fuel savings offsetting initial costs within a few years, and would provide a model for other U.S. states and Canada.

The report analyzes the drivers of U.S. energy insecurity, highlighting the high dependence on oil imports from unstable regions and the vulnerability of domestic infrastructure like the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System. It argues that energy productivity gains since 1975 have been the nation's largest energy 'source' and that further efficiency improvements in light vehicles could displace net imports from the Persian Gulf.

The document outlines various biomass sources, including residues and perennial energy crops like switchgrass, and describes conversion technologies ranging from direct combustion to fuel cells. It argues that expanding biomass production can revitalize rural economies and protect land quality while potentially providing a significant share of U.S. electricity and motor fuel.

Amory Lovins argues that the California electricity crisis was caused by botched restructuring and concentrated market power rather than a shortage of generating capacity or soaring demand from the Internet. He provides data from the California Energy Commission to show that per-capita electricity use remained flat for twenty-five years and that peak loads in 2000 did not show a general upward trend. Lovins asserts that the crisis was exacerbated by dominant suppliers strategically withholding power to maintain high prices, and he defends his advocacy for energy efficiency and decentralized renewables as successful policies that would have forestalled the disaster had they not been abandoned in the mid-1990s.

The authors oppose a proposal by Colorado State Representative Carl Miller to increase coal use, arguing that coal plants are expensive, polluting, and slow to implement. They propose a transition toward energy efficiency, which could save up to 70% of current electricity use, and distributed energy resources including wind, solar, bio-fuels, and fuel cells. The text highlights the success of wind energy programs in Colorado, such as those by Holy Cross Energy and Public Service Company, as evidence of the viability of a free-market approach to clean energy.

The author contends that nuclear power has suffered a historic industrial collapse due to capital cost escalations and technical failures, making it uncompetitive against cheaper alternatives. The report highlights end-use efficiency as the most potent competitor, noting that well-designed industrial retrofits can save electricity at costs as low as $0.005/kWh. Other viable alternatives mentioned include combined-cycle gas turbines, wind power, and proton-exchange-membrane fuel cells. The author further argues that moving away from civilian nuclear commerce would reduce the risk of nuclear bomb proliferation by making the acquisition of 'bomb-kit ingredients' more conspicuous. Finally, the text asserts that nuclear power exacerbates global warming by displacing more cost-effective energy-saving options, thereby increasing the opportunity cost of climate mitigation.

The report argues that a transition to a renewable-based energy system is technically and economically feasible. The FFES demonstrates that through aggressive energy efficiency improvements, fuel switching, and the adoption of solar, wind, and biomass energy, global CO2 emissions can be reduced to zero by 2100. The analysis emphasizes that such a transition could be achieved at costs similar to or lower than 'business-as-usual' scenarios, provided there is strong policy leadership and international cooperation to overcome market barriers and address economic inequities between the North and South.

The report analyzes four energy scenarios for the US up to 2030: a Reference case, a Market case, an Environmental case, and a Climate Stabilization case. It finds that shifting toward efficiency and renewables can lead to net economic savings of up to $2.3 trillion and dramatic reductions in CO2 emissions. The authors propose a comprehensive policy framework based on harnessing market forces, establishing efficiency standards, and increasing R&D investment to move the US away from its current reliance on polluting fossil fuels.