Search Climate Insights Directory

The report evaluates the EU ETS, concluding that emissions trading is an effective tool for reducing CO2 emissions with modest macroeconomic impacts. It highlights the risks of free allowance allocation, such as windfall profits and reduced economic efficiency, and recommends a transition toward auctioning. The document also identifies that international competitiveness risks are concentrated in a few carbon-intensive sectors and suggests tailored solutions like benchmarked free allocation or multilateral border adjustments to prevent carbon leakage.

A coalition of environmental and community organizations argues against granting special liability relief or regulatory exemptions to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) operators, asserting that such measures create moral hazards and undermine public health and environmental safeguards. The authors specifically oppose exempting geologic sequestration from the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C, arguing that CO2 streams containing impurities could constitute hazardous waste and that existing industrial activities, such as hazardous waste injection, operate without such broad liability shields.

The report documents the negative impacts of Holcim's cement and mining activities in Latin America, focusing on the destruction of aquifers and landscapes, air pollution, and health crises. It highlights the use of 'co-processing' to incinerate hazardous waste and criticizes the role of Free Trade Agreements and international arbitration (CIADI) in protecting corporate interests over community rights. Specific cases include the criminalization of Maya Kaqchikel communities in Guatemala, the degradation of the Tunjuelo River in Bogotá, and neurotoxic acrylates emissions in Mexico. The document concludes by detailing a 2010 complaint filed against Holcim at the Permanent Peoples' Tribunal in Madrid.

The Reefs at Risk Revisited analysis finds that approximately 75 percent of global coral reefs are threatened by local and global pressures, with local threats affecting over 60 percent. Without intervention to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and local pressures, threatened reefs could increase to over 90 percent by 2030 and nearly all reefs by 2050. While over 25 percent of reefs are in marine protected areas, only 6 percent are effectively managed. The report identifies 27 nations as most vulnerable to reef degradation, including Haiti, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

The EPA has introduced new GHG permitting standards under the Clean Air Act, requiring large power plants and refineries to undergo a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis. While states typically issue these permits, the EPA has taken over this role in Arizona and Texas due to non-compliance. The program targets facilities adding more than 75,000 tons of CO2 (or equivalent) and will expand in July 2011 to include all new facilities emitting over 100,000 tons per year. The BACT process involves a five-step evaluation of technology availability, feasibility, effectiveness, and impact to determine the best emission control options.

The author supports the EPA's plan to propose carbon performance standards for power plants by July 2011, arguing that such regulations are necessary in the absence of federal legislation to drive clean energy investment and reduce harmful emissions. The text emphasizes that while coal-fired plants are a major source of pollution and 40% of U.S. carbon emissions, phased-in regulation and the development of a robust carbon capture and storage (CCS) industry are the most effective paths toward climate stabilization.

The Resources and Energy Analysis Programme (REAP) is an environmental analysis tool that uses an environmentally extended input-output model to assess the global environmental impact of consumption at national, regional, and local levels. It tracks greenhouse gases, ecological footprints, and energy sources across the entire life cycle of products and services, including imports. The tool includes a scenario function to model the effects of political decisions, population changes, and shifts in consumption or transport habits. Originally developed in the UK in 2006, a Swedish version was introduced in April 2011.

The study reveals significant gaps in public knowledge regarding climate change in the United States, with a majority of participants failing to demonstrate basic understanding of the greenhouse effect and its causes, despite a general belief that global warming is occurring and a high level of trust in scientific organizations.

The report estimates that fine particle pollution from existing U.S. coal plants would cause nearly 13,200 deaths and over 20,000 heart attacks in 2010, with a total monetized health cost exceeding $100 billion per year. While emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) have declined since 2004 due to the installation of over 130 scrubbers and regulations like the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), the burden remains high, particularly in the Midwest, South, and Mid-Atlantic regions. The authors argue for a stronger Transport Rule and national emission caps to further reduce these health risks.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) supports the EPA's proposed Transport Rule to replace the judicially invalidated Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) but argues it should be strengthened to further reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). CATF specifically advocates for the passage of S. 2995, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 2010 (CAAA of 2010), asserting it would deliver greater emissions reductions, save more lives, and provide more regulatory certainty than the Transport Rule alone. The testimony details the severe health and environmental impacts of power plant emissions, including premature death from fine particulate matter, acid rain damage to eastern ecosystems, and ozone-related crop losses.

The document outlines how transitioning away from fossil fuels reduces health costs via three primary channels: mitigating air and water pollution, reducing obesity through active transportation, and lowering climate change risks. It provides specific 2005 cost estimates for health damages from coal-fired plants ($62 billion), natural gas plants ($740 million), and vehicles ($56 billion). The text emphasizes that obesity currently represents a larger health cost burden in the United States than air quality impacts and suggests that energy policies should be evaluated based on total costs and benefits per unit of energy or distance.

The report analyzes the financial burden on U.S. states that rely on imported coal, identifying those with the highest spending and per capita costs. It highlights a trend of increasing dependence on coal from Wyoming and international sources, particularly in the Southeast and Midwest. The authors argue that these states can redirect funds from coal imports toward energy efficiency and homegrown renewables to create local jobs and reduce carbon emissions.

The report identifies 38 U.S. states as net importers of coal in 2008, with 11 states spending over $1 billion each on these imports. It highlights a growing dependence on coal from Wyoming and international sources, particularly in the Southeast and Midwest. The authors argue that states can mitigate these economic losses and environmental damages by investing in energy efficiency and homegrown renewables.

The document clarifies that in science, uncertainty refers to the degree to which something is known rather than a complete lack of knowledge. It explains that climate scientists use specific probabilistic language—such as 'very likely' to denote a greater than 90 percent chance—to inform public policy and decision-making. While certain facts are established without uncertainty, such as the role of fossil fuels and the greenhouse effect in warming the Earth, uncertainties remain regarding the exact magnitude of future warming and the timing of specific ecological losses, often depending on future human actions to reduce emissions.

The study examines how vegetation-environment interactions define ecotones in Canada and South America, finding that while climate warming can push treelines upward in the Andes, human disturbances and water scarcity often counteract these trends. In the Gran Chaco, deforestation is driven by land use and market demands, and in both Canada and Brazil, the growth-boosting effects of increased CO2 are being offset by decreasing water availability.

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 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).

The Union of Concerned Scientists outlines ten reasons to reduce tropical deforestation, noting that it accounts for approximately 10 percent of global warming pollution. The document asserts that reducing these emissions is more cost-effective than reducing industrial fossil fuel emissions and can be achieved with a global investment of $20 billion per year to cut emissions in half by 2020. It highlights the role of tropical forests in carbon sequestration and biodiversity protection, while citing progress in Brazil and Indonesia as evidence that solutions are viable.

The document examines the rapid decline of Arctic sea ice and the potential for geoengineering, specifically solar radiation management, as a last-resort insurance policy. It critiques the 'business-as-usual' approach of Arctic nations that prioritize resource extraction over climate mitigation and proposes that the Arctic Council use its scientific legitimacy and inclusive structure to frame the geoengineering debate and conduct necessary research.

The document outlines how scientists use climate models, atmospheric records, and carbon isotope signatures to prove that human-induced greenhouse gas emissions are the primary driver of global warming since the mid-20th century. It highlights the consensus among the scientific community and major bodies like the IPCC, while noting that attribution science can now link specific extreme weather events to climate change.