Search Climate Insights Directory

RMI research indicates that clean energy portfolios are now cost-competitive with new natural gas power plants. Consequently, over $70 billion in planned gas-fired power plant construction and $30 billion in new interstate pipelines face significant stranded cost risks, as these assets may become uneconomic by 2035 and lead to increased gas delivery costs.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER), writing on behalf of the Life After Coal Campaign, challenges statements made by Minister Jeff Radebe regarding the viability of "clean coal" technologies. The CER asserts that "clean coal" is a misnomer and a myth, arguing that no technology can neutralize the environmental, health, and climate impacts of the entire coal cycle. The document advocates for a coal phase-out and a just transition to sustainable energy systems, citing declining coal employment and consumption in South Africa as evidence of an inevitable shift. It emphasizes that achieving the IPCC's 1.5 degree Celsius target requires drastic CO2 reductions, which necessitates moving away from coal toward socially-owned renewable energy projects.

In 2018, global coal power growth indicators declined for the third consecutive year, with new construction capacity falling 39% compared to 2017. While China and India saw record lows in new permits, China remained an outlier by resuming construction on previously frozen projects. The United States led the world in plant closures, recording 17.6 GW of decommissioned capacity. The report highlights that meeting IPCC climate goals of 1.5°C to 2°C requires a rapid phase-out of coal, yet China's China Electricity Council has proposed increasing its coal capacity limit to 1,300 GW by 2030. In India, coal is facing stiff competition from cheaper solar and wind energy, while Vietnam has seen the fastest growth in coal capacity among countries with over 4 GW, though it is facing increasing public opposition and financial tightening from Japanese banks.

The report finds a three-year decline in global coal power growth indicators as of 2018, driven by record reductions in permits in China and India and accelerated closures in the US. However, it highlights a contradictory trend where financial institutions from China, Japan, and South Korea have become the primary funders for overseas coal projects. While global planned capacity has dropped significantly since 2015, the report warns that current operational plants already exceed the IPCC's carbon limits for 1.5°C and 2°C warming targets. It specifically notes China's potential to add up to 290GW of capacity by 2030 if a proposal by the China Electricity Council is adopted.

The 2019 report by Global Energy Monitor, Sierra Club, and Greenpeace indicates a three-year decline in major growth indicators for coal-fired power generation. While global project pipelines and new licenses in China and India have dropped significantly, China remains a critical factor due to its financing of international projects and potential policy shifts regarding its domestic capacity ceiling. The United States led the world in coal plant retirements in 2018, despite political efforts to maintain aging plants. The report emphasizes that current operational coal capacity exceeds the limits required to meet IPCC climate goals of 1.5°C or 2°C warming.

The document introduces SEI-PCS, a modeling tool designed to overcome the limitations of traditional country-level footprinting by providing spatially explicit data on production-to-consumption systems. By integrating subnational production data, domestic trade flows, and international customs data, SEI-PCS allows for the tracing of commodities back to their origin to assess impacts such as carbon emissions, biodiversity loss, and deforestation. The tool is the foundation for the Trase initiative, which specifically monitors deforestation risks associated with agricultural commodities like soy in Brazil, Indonesia, and Latin America, helping companies and governments evaluate the effectiveness of zero-deforestation commitments and identify policy 'leakage' effects.

The document details the costs and benefits of transitioning to clean transportation in Connecticut. By 2050, a total investment of $51.5 billion in electrification, fuel efficiency, and low-carbon fuels is projected to generate $72.5 billion in returns, resulting in a net benefit of over $21 billion. These investments would lead to 149.9 million metric tons of avoided CO2 and a reduction of 15.5 billion gallons of fossil-based liquid fuels.

The document details the costs and benefits of transitioning to clean transportation in the District of Columbia. It estimates that a total investment of $5.6 billion by 2050 will generate a cumulative net benefit of more than $2.5 billion, primarily driven by fuel savings. The transition is expected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 17 million metric tons and save almost 1.8 billion gallons of fossil-based liquid fuels by 2050.

The document details the costs and benefits of transitioning Delaware to clean transportation technologies, including vehicle electrification, fuel efficiency, and low-carbon fuels. It projects that a total investment of $18 billion by 2050 will generate a cumulative net benefit of $6.6 billion, primarily driven by fuel savings and avoided environmental costs, while significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

The document details the costs and benefits of transitioning to clean transportation in Maryland, projecting a cumulative net benefit of nearly $40 billion by 2050 through fuel efficiency, electrification, and low-carbon fuels.

The document details the financial and environmental impacts of transitioning to clean transportation in Maine. It estimates that a total investment of nearly $27 billion by 2050 would yield nearly $37 billion in returns, resulting in a net benefit of over $9 billion. Key benefits include significant fuel savings, reduced carbon dioxide emissions, and improved local air quality.

The document details the costs and benefits of transitioning New Hampshire's transportation sector to clean technologies by 2050. It projects a cumulative net benefit of approximately $8.6 billion, driven primarily by fuel savings, while estimating a total investment of nearly $22 billion, with electricity generation and storage being the largest cost. Environmentally, the transition is expected to avoid over 63 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and reduce fossil fuel use by more than 6.5 billion gallons by 2050.

The document details the costs and benefits of three technology pathways—fuel efficiency, electrification, and low-carbon fuels—for New Jersey. It projects that by 2050, a total investment of nearly $122 billion will generate over $171 billion in returns, resulting in a cumulative net benefit of almost $50 billion. These transitions are expected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 353.6 million metric tons and save nearly 37 billion gallons of fossil-based liquid fuels by 2050.

The document details the financial and environmental impacts of transitioning to clean transportation in New York. It estimates that by 2050, cumulative investments of nearly $218 billion in electrification, efficiency, and low-carbon fuels will yield a net benefit of $80.5 billion, primarily driven by fuel savings and avoided environmental costs.

The Union of Concerned Scientists reports that investing in fuel efficiency, vehicle electrification, and low-carbon fuels in Pennsylvania would result in a cumulative net benefit of over $60 billion by 2050. The analysis indicates that while electricity generation and storage represent the largest investment cost, these are offset by significant fuel savings and avoided environmental and health costs. By 2050, these measures would avoid 515.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and reduce fossil-based liquid fuel use by 52.5 billion gallons.

The document details the costs and benefits of transitioning to clean transportation in Virginia by 2050. It estimates that a total investment of $142.5 billion in electrification, fuel efficiency, and low-carbon fuels will generate a cumulative net benefit of nearly $57 billion, primarily driven by fuel savings and avoided environmental costs, while reducing CO2 emissions by 412.1 million metric tons.

The document details the economic and environmental impact of transitioning to clean transportation in Vermont. It estimates that a total investment of $13.4 billion by 2050 will result in a cumulative net benefit of $4.5 billion, driven primarily by fuel savings and avoided environmental costs, while significantly reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

The report identifies a systemic failure in the plastic life cycle where the cost of pollution is not borne by producers or converters, leading to a 'tragedy of the commons'. It projects that under a 'business as usual' scenario, plastic pollution will double by 2030, with ocean plastic potentially reaching 300 million metric tons. The document highlights that 37% of plastic waste is currently mismanaged, and carbon emissions from plastic incineration could triple by 2030. To counter this, WWF proposes a 'no plastic in nature' scenario that includes phasing out single-use plastics, achieving 100% waste collection, and establishing a multilateral agreement to hold all stakeholders accountable across the value chain.

The report examines the challenges facing sustainable investing due to substandard ESG data, highlighting issues such as lack of standardization, poor coverage, and a specific inability to quantify physical climate risks. Based on interviews with investment practitioners managing $5.2 trillion in assets, it argues that while disclosure frameworks like TCFD and SASB are improving the landscape, investors still lack the granular asset-level data and standardized methodologies required to translate sustainability metrics into financial materiality. The document proposes several solutions, including the development of a Physical Resilience Protocol and the use of geospatial data to fill context gaps in corporate reporting.

A survey of U.S. adults from 2013 to 2018 shows a significant shift in climate change attitudes, with the proportion of 'Alarmed' individuals doubling to 29% by December 2018, while 'Dismissive' and 'Doubtful' segments decreased.