Search Climate Insights Directory

The document examines the steel sector's role in global emissions, focusing on abatement opportunities in China and India. It identifies four currently available abatement categories—closing inefficient plants, improving efficiency in existing plants, using best available technology (BAT) for new builds, and increasing scrap recycling—and notes that deep cuts will require carbon capture and storage (CCS) or breakthrough technologies after 2020. The report argues that carbon pricing alone is insufficient to overcome barriers like high capital costs and lack of policy, suggesting that Sectoral Approaches and Agreements should combine price and non-price incentives. Initial modelling suggests that with a carbon price of $25/tCO2, China could abate up to 150 MtCO2/year and India up to 40 MtCO2/year, potentially generating $2bn and $0.5bn in annual credits respectively.

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and Friends of the Earth Europe argue that Europe can achieve a 40% reduction in emissions by 2020 and 90% by 2050 through radical energy system changes and lifestyle shifts. The study estimates the implementation cost at approximately 2% of Europe's discounted cumulative GDP between 2010 and 2020. To achieve climate justice, the report suggests Europe must also provide between €150 billion and €450 billion annually to developing countries by 2020. The proposed pathway excludes nuclear power, biofuels, and carbon capture and storage, focusing instead on wind energy, electrification, and energy efficiency.

The document examines China's heavy reliance on coal-fired power, which makes it a global leader in sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide emissions. It analyzes the 'big up/small down' strategy to replace inefficient small thermal units with larger, cleaner ones and reviews international best practices—including carbon taxes, feed-in tariffs, and emission trading—to suggest policy options for China to reduce its carbon intensity and protect its exports from future climate-related trade barriers.

The document analyzes the energy profiles, infrastructure, and security perspectives of Canada, the United States, and Mexico, highlighting their deep interdependence. It examines existing trilateral and bilateral cooperation frameworks, such as NAFTA and the U.S.-Canada Clean Energy Dialogue, and identifies potential trade irritants like border adjustments and low-carbon fuel standards. The author proposes three climate policy scenarios for 2020, concluding that a 'bottom-up' approach with increasing linkages between Canadian and U.S. cap-and-trade systems is the most likely outcome.

The study demonstrates that the EU can achieve domestic emission cuts of 40% by 2020 and 90% by 2050 through radical energy efficiency, a shift to renewables, and the phase-out of fossil fuels and nuclear power. It argues that such a transition is technically possible and economically bearable, costing approximately 2% of the EU's cumulative discounted GDP between 2010 and 2020. To achieve climate justice, the report asserts the EU must also provide between €150 billion and €450 billion annually by 2020 to support mitigation in developing countries.

The report argues that China can achieve a deep carbon reduction by 2050 through sectoral transformations in electricity, industry, transport, and buildings, provided it receives international financial and technological support. It proposes a combination of domestic carbon taxes, a future cap-and-trade system, and a new 'Inter-country Joint Mitigation Plan' to facilitate technology transfer. The analysis emphasizes that a low-carbon transition is essential for China's modernization, offering opportunities to move up the value chain and improve energy security, though it will require active labour market policies to manage job losses in heavy industry.

The report presents a mitigation scenario for the EU27 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% in 2020 and 90% by 2050 relative to 1990 levels. This is achieved through radical energy efficiency, a shift to renewables, and the phase-out of fossil fuels, nuclear power, and carbon capture and storage. The analysis also estimates that Europe's fair share of international climate finance for developing nations would range between €150 billion and €450 billion by 2020.

The document provides a comprehensive review of various Integrated Impact Assessment Models (IAMs), categorizing them into fully integrated, non-CGE, and CGE-type models. It specifically examines the 'damage functions' used to translate temperature increases into economic losses, noting a high degree of subjectivity and uncertainty in these calculations due to a lack of empirical data.

The document argues that South Africa's international credibility in climate negotiations is undermined by a domestic reliance on fossil fuels and a slow integration of climate considerations into economic policy. Using Robert Putnam's 'two-level game' framework, it highlights the tension between Level I (international negotiations) and Level II (domestic interests), particularly the influence of the coal and oil industries. While South Africa champions developing nations' interests globally, its domestic energy strategy continues to favour coal-fired power and coal-to-liquids technology. The paper suggests that the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region offers untapped renewable energy potential that could help reconcile these competing imperatives.

The report argues that stabilizing atmospheric CO2 at 350 ppm is economically feasible, with estimated costs ranging from 1% to 3% of global GDP per year. It challenges 'go slow' economic recommendations, specifically critiquing the DICE model's default assumptions, and suggests that the costs of inaction far outweigh the costs of rapid mitigation. The authors emphasize that achieving this target requires a comprehensive global transition to carbon-free energy and the implementation of negative emissions technologies, such as large-scale reforestation and biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Friends of the Earth criticizes the Kerry-Boxer draft climate bill for failing to meet scientific requirements for emissions reductions and for including unreliable offsets and subsidies for 'dirty energy' technologies.

The report evaluates the EU-South Africa Strategic Partnership, highlighting its shift from a development-focused relationship to a high-level political alliance. It details cooperation across 13 pillars, including energy, science, and climate change, while noting tensions over economic partnership agreement (EPA) negotiations and sanctions on Zimbabwe.

The report explores advanced technologies for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and coal gasification to identify pathways for cost reduction and efficiency improvements. It provides research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) road maps for four specific areas: underground coal gasification, next-generation surface-based gasification, advanced post-combustion capture of CO2, and geological CO2 sequestration.

The paper argues that climate change is a global public bad requiring coordinated public-sector intervention. It posits that 'knowledge communities'—groups of experts who produce and share scientific information—are essential for driving the paradigm shifts and technological adoption needed for mitigation. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is highlighted as a primary catalyst for this global learning process. The authors also analyze economic instruments for emission reduction, such as the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), taxes, and standards, while noting the difficulties of international cooperation under frameworks like the Kyoto Protocol.

The report argues that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is essential for mitigating global climate change given the continued reliance on coal. It identifies four critical technology areas requiring accelerated federal investment: underground coal gasification (UCG), next-generation surface coal gasification, advanced post-combustion capture (PCC), and geologic carbon sequestration (GCS). For each area, the authors provide specific RD&D roadmaps, including funding estimates and technical priorities. Key recommendations include the creation of a 'first commercial project fund' to help technologies bridge the 'Valley of Death' between pilot and commercial scale, and the establishment of international collaborations to facilitate technology transfer to countries like China and India.

The report argues that the U.S. energy innovation system is in urgent need of reform, moving away from a reliance on the Department of Energy (DOE) and a hope for unpredictable 'breakthroughs' toward a portfolio of incremental improvements. It proposes treating climate mitigation as a public good and a public works endeavor, utilizing government procurement and competition between agencies—such as the Department of Defense (DoD)—to drive innovation. Through case studies of solar photovoltaics, post-combustion capture (PCC), and direct air capture, the authors emphasize the critical role of demonstration projects in reducing technical and cost uncertainties for large-scale deployment.

The document advocates for a transition to a clean energy economy in the United States, specifically promoting the 'Climate 2030: A National Blueprint for a Clean Energy Economy'. It argues that such a transition would generate $255 billion in net annual savings by 2030, create hundreds of thousands of jobs, and reduce reliance on foreign oil. The text compares these goals with the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), noting that while ACES has minimal negative economic impact, the more comprehensive Blueprint policies offer greater benefits in terms of emissions cuts and cost savings.

The document examines the 'price-gap' method of measuring energy subsidies, which calculates the difference between domestic and world reference prices. While the author acknowledges its simplicity and utility for international benchmarking, the paper argues that the method creates 'blind spots' by ignoring subsidies that do not alter market prices, such as credit subsidies, R&D funding, and risk transfers. This leads to a significant understatement of the total fiscal and environmental costs of fossil fuel supports. The author recommends a hybrid approach, combining annual price-gap tracking with comprehensive 'transfer-based' evaluations every five years for major energy nations.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) urges Congress to implement a multi-pollutant policy to address the public health and environmental crises caused by power plant emissions. CATF proposes capping sulfur dioxide at 2 million tons per year and nitrogen oxides at 1.6 million tons per year, while requiring a 95% reduction in mercury emissions. The document highlights that current regulations are insufficient to prevent 30,000 annual premature deaths or allow ecosystem recovery from acid rain. It further argues that these pollution controls are necessary prerequisites for the effective operation of carbon capture technologies and should be linked to any free carbon allowances provided under climate legislation like the Waxman-Markey bill.

The report projects that Illinois will face significantly hotter summers, increased flash flooding, and severe threats to agriculture if heat-trapping emissions continue to rise. Under a higher-emissions scenario, Chicago could see more than 70 days above 90°F per summer by the end of the century, and corn yields could decline by as much as 50% by mid-century. The document advocates for a transition to clean energy, including renewable electricity standards and a moratorium on new coal plants, alongside federal cap-and-trade legislation to mitigate these risks.