Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency in Tennessee, asserting that specific policies can help the state meet carbon pollution goals and save residents money.

The document outlines the economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency in Texas, stating that specific policies could save the state $5.5 billion and significantly reduce carbon and air pollutants by 2030.

The document outlines the economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency in Utah, stating that specific policies could save residents $5.8 billion on utility bills and avoid 4 million tons of CO2 by 2030.

The document outlines the economic and environmental benefits of adopting energy efficiency policies in Virginia, asserting that such measures can help the state meet 85% of its carbon pollution reduction goals under the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. It highlights that specific interventions—including private sector energy service contracts, national model building codes, and 100 MWs of new combined heat and power—could avoid over 7 million tons of CO2 and save Virginians $1.8 billion by 2030.

This fact sheet outlines the economic and environmental benefits of implementing energy efficiency policies in Wisconsin. It asserts that such measures can help the state meet a significant portion of its carbon pollution goals under the EPA's Clean Power Plan while providing substantial financial savings for residents and government entities.

The document outlines the economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency in West Virginia, stating that specific policies could save the state $410 million and avoid over 5 million tons of CO2 by 2030. It emphasizes that these measures would assist in meeting 26% of the state's carbon pollution reduction goal under the EPA's Clean Power Plan and significantly reduce nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions.

The document outlines the economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency in Wyoming, specifically highlighting how an annual energy savings target of 1.5%, national model building codes, and 40 MWs of new combined heat and power could avoid 2.6 million tons of CO2 and save residents over $2 billion by 2030.

The United States aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 50 to 52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, but the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is projected to achieve only a 40 percent reduction. To close this gap, the document recommends stronger federal and state standards for electricity, industry, transportation, and buildings. Modeling indicates that achieving the NDC would significantly increase public health and economic benefits compared to the IRA alone, avoiding 6,800 premature deaths and adding $690 billion per year to GDP.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provides significant funding for residential, commercial, and federal building decarbonization, including nearly $9.9 billion for high-efficiency electric residential buildings and $1 billion for building code adoption. Energy Innovation modeling suggests these provisions could save households $80 annually and create 1.2 to 1.3 million net new jobs by 2030. However, the document asserts that because of slow equipment turnover, the U.S. requires more stringent appliance standards and active implementation by state, local, and Tribal governments—including updated utility planning and workforce support—to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals.

The document argues that U.S. states must implement rapid responsive strategies to counter the economic impacts of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which is projected to increase energy bills by $170 billion and cost 790,000 jobs by 2035. Specifically focusing on electric transportation, it highlights that while federal incentives for EVs and charging end in September 2025, states can maintain progress by addressing barriers such as high upfront costs, inequitable charging access, and slow interconnection. The guide proposes a toolkit of no-regrets actions, including financial incentives, clean fuel standards, the establishment of a State Charging Infrastructure Coordinator, EV-ready building codes, and government fleet electrification.

The report argues that a small number of well-designed policies—categorized as economic signals, performance standards, and R&D support—can substantially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions and provide economic benefits. It details ten specific policy areas, including vehicle and appliance standards, clean energy supply, and smart urban design, while emphasizing the need for policies to be predictable, market-driven, and synchronized with infrastructure turnover. The text highlights successful examples from the US, China, Europe, and Japan to demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches.

The document highlights the intersection of climate change, urban heat islands, and public health in Chile, specifically within the municipality of Quilpué. It argues that while energy efficiency regulations have progressed since 2006, there is a critical need to incorporate health-focused criteria into building codes and housing policies to address energy poverty and the health impacts of extreme temperatures.

Buildings contribute at least 39% of annual global energy-related carbon emissions, with at least 25% of those coming from embodied carbon in materials and construction. The document outlines five policy strategies—procurement policy, climate action plans, building codes, low-carbon design, and design for longevity—to stimulate market demand for low-carbon solutions without increasing construction costs or government spending.

The briefing identifies that city governments could reduce annual GHG emissions by up to 8 Gt CO2e by 2050 through coordinated action with national governments. It proposes a framework where cities lead in areas like spatial planning and transit (20% of potential), implement national standards in buildings (40%), and act as strategic partners for technology adoption like electric vehicles and solar PV (40%). The report emphasizes that national governments must remove financial, technical, and legal constraints to unlock this potential, providing specific examples of opportunities in China, the United States, and Brazil.

The report identifies energy efficiency as the most cost-effective strategy for cutting U.S. carbon emissions, focusing on the industrial and building sectors which together account for two-thirds of U.S. carbon emissions. It details technical opportunities such as combined-heat-and-power (CHP) systems, building envelope improvements, and high-efficiency appliances. The document proposes a 'Blueprint' of policies—including efficiency standards, resource standards (EERS), and updated building codes—that could reduce total U.S. energy consumption by 29 percent by 2030. It highlights that while technical potential is high, barriers such as 'split incentives' and high up-front costs persist, requiring coordinated federal and state intervention.

The document outlines a supplemental analysis by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) to quantify the impact of nine energy efficiency policies across residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. By 2030, these policies are projected to achieve cumulative end-use energy savings of 12.1 quadrillion BTUs, representing a 29 percent reduction in projected energy consumption compared to a reference case. The analysis estimates that annual policy costs will rise from $7.5 billion in 2020 to $13.4 billion in 2030, stimulating private investment of $113.6 billion by 2030. Key policies include federal appliance standards, an Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS) for electricity and natural gas, updated building codes, and expanded R&D. The modeling utilizes the Energy Information Administration's NEMS model to determine effects on electricity generation, carbon dioxide emissions, and energy prices.

The document argues that improving building efficiency is a cost-effective way to reduce global energy consumption and CO2 emissions while creating jobs and improving urban livability. It outlines eight specific actions for city leaders—ranging from implementing building codes and setting targets to engaging utilities and the private sector—and provides a strategic framework for developing integrated action plans to overcome market and institutional barriers.