Search Climate Insights Directory

The document details the methodology for 'The Natural Gas Gamble' report, utilizing a modified National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) to compare three primary policy scenarios: Business as Usual, a Carbon Standard, and a Carbon Standard combined with renewable energy and energy efficiency policies. It outlines specific adjustments made to U.S. Department of Energy assumptions regarding capital costs and capacity factors for various energy technologies, including wind, solar, nuclear, and carbon capture and storage. Additionally, it describes sensitivity analyses based on high and low natural gas price projections and explains the calculations used to determine the social costs of carbon and the health benefits of reducing sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.

The paper examines the conflict between bioenergy production and the global need for food, feed, and carbon sequestration. It argues that dedicated land use for bioenergy—including crop-based biofuels and cellulosic energy crops—exacerbates a projected 70 percent crop calorie gap by 2050. The authors contend that bioenergy is an inefficient use of solar radiation compared to solar photovoltaics (PV), which can produce over 100 times more energy per hectare. Furthermore, the document identifies a systemic 'double counting' error in greenhouse gas accounting that erroneously treats biomass as carbon-free. It recommends phasing out subsidies and mandates for land-dedicated bioenergy while prioritizing 'additional' biomass sources such as municipal waste and specific residues.

Between 1920 and 1960, the southern United States experienced a net increase of 6 million hectares of forest cover through a combination of active planting and passive regeneration. This restoration was driven by economic benefits, crisis events like the Great Depression and severe soil erosion, and enabling conditions such as secure property rights and the decline of wood-fired energy. Key implementation tools included the Civilian Conservation Corps and the USDA's Soil Bank Program. However, the trend reversed in the 1970s as suburban expansion became the primary driver of forest conversion, and the region saw a shift toward productive planted forests, such as loblolly and slash pine plantations, which comprised about 20 percent of the total southern U.S. forest area by 2006.

The author defends the EPA's use of the Clean Air Act to mandate deep carbon pollution reductions in the power industry, rejecting claims by certain members of Congress that federal subsidies for clean coal projects prohibit those technologies from being used to set performance standards. The author asserts that the EPA relies on a global array of projects to demonstrate that carbon capture and sequestration is a viable 'best system of emissions control'.

The report argues that Anglo American and other dirty energy corporations have 'captured' climate policy-making, particularly within the UNFCCC, to protect their business models. It highlights the severe social and environmental damage caused by the El Cerrejón coal mine in Colombia, including water scarcity and the displacement of indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. The document details Anglo American's use of a 'web of influence'—including memberships in groups like the ICC, WBCSD, and EUROMINES—to lobby for market-based mechanisms such as carbon trading and carbon capture and storage (CCS), which the authors term 'false solutions'. It concludes by calling for the removal of corporate privileged access to climate negotiations, the end of public subsidies for dirty energy, and increased lobby transparency.

The report denounces Anglo American for using its privileged access to governments and the UNFCCC to undermine genuine climate action in favor of 'false solutions' like carbon markets and carbon capture. It highlights the severe social and environmental impacts of the El Cerrejón coal mine in Colombia, including water scarcity and the displacement of indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. The document argues that corporate capture of international climate negotiations prevents the addressing of systemic causes of climate change and calls for the complete removal of corporate influence from climate policy-making.

The report exposes the dual nature of Anglo American's operations: the severe human rights and environmental impacts of its El Cerrejón coal mine in Colombia, and its strategic lobbying within the UNFCCC and other international bodies to maintain a fossil-fuel-based energy model. It argues that the company promotes 'false solutions'—such as carbon markets and carbon capture and storage (CCS)—to avoid structural changes and continue profiting from pollution. The authors call for the removal of corporate privileged access to climate negotiations and the end of public subsidies for polluting energies.

The document analyzes the evolving energy partnership between the US and South Africa, framed by the US's shift toward energy independence via shale gas and its 'Power Africa' initiative. While South Africa is interested in the US model for shale gas and renewables, the briefing argues that South Africa must remain cautious regarding hydraulic fracturing due to severe water constraints and infrastructure gaps. It highlights the US-South Africa Strategic Dialogue as a mechanism for cooperation on clean energy, carbon capture, and hydrocarbon development, while noting that US initiatives in Africa have targeted a limited number of countries.

The report identifies a portfolio of low-carbon opportunities for the European steel sector, ranging from energy efficiency and fuel shifting to breakthrough technologies like Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and increased recycling. It argues that current EU ETS mechanisms, particularly free allocation based on historic volumes, fail to provide sufficient incentives for deep decarbonisation and high-value product innovation. The authors recommend a structural reform of leakage protection, specifically proposing a combination of output-based allocation and the inclusion of consumption in the EU ETS to create a credible business case for breakthrough technologies and material efficiency. The report also emphasizes the need for sustained public funding for process innovation to overcome the 'valley of death' in technology scaling and suggests strengthening links between steel producers and downstream consumers, particularly in the automotive and construction sectors, to drive demand for lightweight, high-strength steels.

The report argues that transitioning to a low-carbon economy can increase global financial capacity rather than deplete it. For the electricity sector, the transition could provide a net benefit of $1.8 trillion by 2035, as significant operating savings from avoided fossil fuel extraction and transport outweigh higher capital costs and stranded assets. In the transport sector, the impact is more policy-dependent, ranging from a $2.5 trillion cost to a $3.5 trillion benefit, depending on whether the transition is driven by taxes or innovation. The authors emphasize that reducing the cost of capital for low-carbon infrastructure through regulatory and financial reforms is critical to maximizing these benefits.

The report estimates that a transition to a low-carbon economy could put nearly $25 trillion of fossil fuel asset value at risk, with approximately 80% of this risk borne by governments rather than private investors. The analysis highlights that oil represents the majority of value at risk (close to 75%), while coal offers the highest emissions reduction potential with relatively low stranding risk (12%). The document argues that the net economic impact depends heavily on policy: a purely tax-based approach to reducing oil demand could cost the global economy $3 trillion, whereas an innovation-led transition could yield a net benefit of $7 trillion. It recommends prioritizing the phase-out of coal and utilizing financial mechanisms to lower the cost of renewable energy in emerging markets.

The document argues that the world must move beyond incremental change to a systemic low-carbon transformation. It identifies commercially available technologies in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and land-use practices that can be scaled immediately. It emphasizes the need for carbon pricing, the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, and a rapid phase-out of unabated coal to avoid catastrophic climate feedbacks and high future mitigation costs.

The event, organized by TERI in cooperation with the IPCC and CDKN, focused on India's vulnerability to climate change and the need for urgent adaptation and mitigation. Key discussions highlighted the risk of increased monsoon intensity and decreased rainy days, the threat of climate change as a 'threat multiplier' for India's poor rural population, and the potential for low-carbon economic growth. Speakers emphasized the importance of science, technology, and energy efficiency, while noting that the global carbon budget has already been halved.

EU coal emissions rose 6% from 2010 to 2013, contributing to 18% of total EU CO2 emissions. This increase was driven by fuel-switching from gas to coal in Germany, the UK, and Poland, which together account for 66% of coal-based emissions. While renewables and falling demand reduced overall fossil generation by 4.3% per year, the low carbon price under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) failed to prevent coal's resurgence. The report warns that the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) may not force expected closures because of cheaper compliance technologies and the introduction of capacity markets, particularly in the UK and Poland, which risk locking in high-carbon infrastructure into the 2030s. Modelling suggests that if coal remains cheaper than gas, emissions will fall only 3% by 2016, though the potential for fuel-switching will increase by 2020. Sandbag recommends urgent ETS reform, mandatory carbon intensity reporting, and targeted CCS funding.

The analysis reveals a sharp ideological divide between left-wing parties (PES, EGP, EL) and right-wing parties (EPP, ALDE) concerning the causes of the financial crisis and the role of public investment. While there is broad consensus on the need for a transition to renewable energy, the European Green Party (EGP) is the only party providing specific quantitative targets for carbon emissions and energy efficiency. Democratic reform is prioritized by smaller parties (ALDE, EGP, EL), whereas the larger PES and EPP parties largely ignore treaty reform in their platforms.

The report assesses South Africa's readiness for climate compatible development (CCD), defining it as low-carbon, climate-resilient development. It identifies significant research needs across eleven themes, including water security, food security, and health. While South Africa possesses a strong, networked research infrastructure led by the DST and NRF, the report highlights critical gaps in individual skills (such as systems thinking), institutional funding cycles that are too short for complex social-ecological research, and an uneven distribution of capacity across the 23 public universities. It emphasizes the need for transdisciplinary approaches and a shift from 'siloed' sectoral planning to integrated CCD strategies.

The report assesses the 2009-2014 European Parliament term from a Green perspective, highlighting victories in energy efficiency, data protection, and fisheries, while critiquing the influence of fossil fuel and agro-industrial lobbies. It argues for a more democratic, social, and ecologically sustainable European Union to counter neoliberal austerity and conservative pushback.

The document examines how the global shift toward a low-carbon economy creates the risk of 'stranded assets'—productive assets that suffer premature write-offs or downward revaluations. It highlights that current market valuations often ignore long-term carbon targets, leading to overinvestment in fossil fuels. Using HSBC analysis, the report quantifies potential value losses in the coal and oil and gas sectors, while also noting the impact of water stress on China's energy sector. It concludes by recommending four themes for capital market alignment: capital stewardship in high-carbon sectors, linking financial incentives to ESG factors, climate-proofing financial regulation, and setting portfolio climate targets for institutional investors.

The Obama administration's FY 2015 budget proposal emphasizes a "all of the above" energy strategy and the 2013 Climate Action Plan. Key financial highlights include a $1 billion Climate Fund for community adaptation, a $56 billion resilient infrastructure package, and a 26 percent increase in Department of Transportation funding to address an $86 billion maintenance backlog. The budget proposes making renewable energy tax credits permanent and eliminating $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies. Significant funding increases are directed toward the DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ($2.3 billion) and various sustainable transportation and building initiatives, while the EPA's overall budget is reduced by 3.8 percent.

The document examines the risks of relying on natural gas for US electricity, noting that while it burns cleaner than coal, its expected replacement of nuclear power and its role in meeting rising electricity demand would prevent necessary emission cuts. It highlights that methane leaks from production and transport further erode climate benefits, and suggests that a transition to 80% renewable energy by 2050 is a viable, more cost-effective alternative.