Search Climate Insights Directory

The report evaluates Hawai`i County's goals across ten areas, including affordable housing, energy self-sufficiency, and environmental stewardship. It argues that the loss of local land control to outside investors is the island's most critical challenge, driving a housing crisis and eroding the social fabric (ohana). RMI recommends implementing land trusts, deed restrictions, and green building standards to ensure permanent affordability. The document emphasizes 'whole-system thinking' to address root causes rather than symptoms, suggesting that the county maximize its local economic multiplier by producing energy and food locally. A significant portion of the report is dedicated to proposing specific indicators to measure progress toward these goals to ensure transparency and durability.

The guide estimates that three days of Christmas celebrations can generate up to 650 kg of CO2 per person, representing 5.5% of an individual's annual carbon footprint, but notes that this can be reduced by over 60% to 250 kg through targeted actions regarding food, travel, lighting, and gifts.

The text posits that energy efficiency investments are irreversible and more cost-effective than purchasing oil. It highlights the potential for ultralight materials, plug-in hybrids, and biofuels to drastically reduce oil consumption, suggesting that the US could eliminate its oil use by the 2040s at a cost of $15 per barrel. The author emphasizes the role of corporate strategy (e.g., Wal-Mart, Boeing, Ford) and the US Pentagon in driving these technological leaps to enhance economic profitability and national security.

The report finds that achieving a 35 mpg fleetwide average by 2018 would create 241,000 net new jobs in the U.S. by 2020, save consumers $37 billion in net costs, and reduce national oil use by 1.6 million barrels per day. Environmental benefits include a reduction of 260 to 264 million metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions by 2020. Job growth is projected across most sectors, particularly services and retail, while the oil industry would see a decline. California is projected to experience the highest job growth and consumer savings.

The author contends that climate solutions are profitable rather than costly, as saving fuel is cheaper than purchasing it. By increasing global energy productivity to approximately 3% per year and removing market barriers to energy efficiency, carbon emissions can be stabilized. The text highlights 'micropower' and 'negawatts' as economically superior alternatives to nuclear power and traditional centralized electricity, suggesting that a transition away from oil and toward a diverse, renewable system is driven by business logic and market forces.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed the potential effects of Washington's Initiative 937 (I-937), which would require large electric utilities to source 15 percent of electricity from eligible renewable resources by 2020 and pursue cost-effective energy conservation. Under an expected case scenario, the report projects that by 2025, I-937 would result in $1.13 billion in cumulative savings on consumer electricity bills, the creation of 2,000 new jobs, and a reduction of 4.6 million metric tons of annual CO2 emissions. The analysis indicates that renewable energy and efficiency investments would be cost-competitive with conventional fossil fuel resources, providing long-term price stability and economic development, including $2.9 billion in new capital investment. Sensitivity analyses suggest that even under pessimistic conditions—such as higher wind costs or the expiration of federal tax credits—the initiative would generally still yield long-term savings and environmental benefits.

The document asserts that new conventional coal plants are imprudent investments due to the certainty of future U.S. federal CO2 regulations, likely in the form of a cap-and-trade system. It argues that such regulations will significantly raise the cost of coal-fired electricity, making energy efficiency and renewables more competitive. The report urges state regulators to protect ratepayers by either denying the construction of new coal plants or requiring that shareholders, rather than customers, bear the financial risk of future carbon compliance costs.

The document outlines how U.S. consumers can support renewable energy via green pricing, green marketing, and Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). It contrasts the environmental benefits of renewables—such as wind, solar, and geothermal—against the pollution and health risks associated with coal, oil, nuclear power, and natural gas. It also provides tools for verifying green power claims, including the Green-e certification and the Power Scorecard tool.

The document describes geothermal energy as the third largest renewable energy source, noting that the United States is the world's largest producer with 2,800 MW of connected capacity. It details three power plant technologies—flash steam, dry steam, and binary cycle—alongside direct-use and heat pump applications. Key benefits include base load power availability and significantly lower CO2 emissions compared to coal, though the document notes risks such as land subsidence and induced seismicity.

The document describes solar water heating systems, which use solar collectors and storage tanks to provide hot water, space heating, and air conditioning. In the United States, over 1.5 million homes and businesses use these systems, with a potential for 29 million installations if 40% of homes have sufficient sunlight. The technology is categorized into direct and indirect systems for temperature management, and passive (thermosiphons) and active (pump-based) systems for circulation. While initial costs are higher than conventional heaters ($1,500–$3,500 versus $150–$450), they typically pay for themselves within 4 to 8 years through energy savings. Environmental benefits include the prevention of over 50 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per unit over 20 years.

The document outlines the state of the US wind energy sector as of 2006, noting that installed capacity reached 6,740 MW in 2004. It highlights the role of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) in driving growth and reducing costs to between $0.03 and $0.06 per kWh. The text compares onshore and offshore wind potential, discusses the environmental benefits of avoiding carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide emissions, and notes that the US has been surpassed by Germany, Spain, Denmark, and the UK in wind capacity and technology development.

India and China are experiencing rapid economic growth and a corresponding surge in energy consumption, leading to an increasing reliance on imported oil, primarily from the Persian Gulf. Both nations are pursuing similar strategies to mitigate this vulnerability: diversifying import sources, acquiring equity oil through overseas investments, building strategic petroleum reserves (SPRs), and shifting toward natural gas and nuclear power. While there are efforts toward Sino-Indian energy cooperation, such as joint bids for oilfields in third countries, competition remains high, particularly in contested areas like Burma. The report outlines three future scenarios: 'Increased cooperation,' 'Conflict in East Asia' (centered on Taiwan and Japan), and 'The Middle East explodes' (a full-scale resource war). It recommends that Norway support energy efficiency, clean coal and gas technologies, and the inclusion of China and India in the International Energy Agency (IEA).

The document outlines a strategy for U.S. energy independence based on three pillars: resilient infrastructure, phasing out unreliable fuel sources, and eliminating oil reliance. It advocates for decentralized 'micropower' over nuclear power to reduce proliferation risks and suggests that oil use can be eliminated by the 2040s through tripled-efficiency vehicles and advanced biofuels at a fraction of the current market price of oil.

As of early 2006, the U.S. wind industry had a generating capacity of 9,149 MW, with 2005 seeing a 35 percent growth in capacity. The document details various federal incentives, including the Production Tax Credit (PTC) and Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBS), as well as state-level mechanisms like Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and Public Benefit Funds (PBF). It highlights the potential for wind energy to provide up to 20 percent of the U.S. power supply if natural gas prices remain above $4 per thousand cubic feet.

The paper asserts that nuclear power is a 'market loser' compared to windpower, cogeneration, and energy efficiency. It claims that nuclear power's high costs and long lead times result in a high opportunity cost, where investments in nuclear power displace far more carbon-reducing capacity than they provide. The author argues that a diversified portfolio of decentralized resources is faster, cheaper, and larger in potential than nuclear power, and that government subsidies for nuclear energy retard overall climate protection efforts.

The paper examines the potential of end-use energy efficiency to displace primary energy supplies and reduce global carbon emissions. It argues that traditional economic models underestimate this potential by ignoring market failures and the benefits of whole-system design. The author demonstrates that integrating efficiency across an entire system—such as a building or a vehicle—can lead to 'expanding returns' where massive energy savings actually reduce total capital costs. The text advocates for a shift from price-centric policies to 'barrier-busting' and competitive markets for 'negawatts' (saved watts) to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy systems.

Earthjustice and a coalition of organizations successfully challenged the Bush-era EPA's 2003 denial of a petition to limit carbon emissions from cars and trucks. This led to the 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which defined carbon emissions as "air pollutants" under the Clean Air Act and required the EPA to set limits if they threaten public health or welfare. Consequently, the EPA determined in 2009 that carbon pollution endangers the public and established the first federal carbon pollution limits for vehicles in 2010, a move upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2012.

The report finds that the average Welsh resident's Ecological Footprint (EF) of 5.25 gha/cap is significantly higher than the global biocapacity of 1.8 gha/cap, implying that nearly three Earths would be needed if everyone lived like a Welsh resident. Food and drink consumption is the largest single component of the EF, while energy consumption is the primary driver of CO2 emissions. The study highlights a discrepancy between 'producer responsibility' (territorial emissions) and 'consumer responsibility' (emissions from consumption), noting that Wales carries an environmental burden for consumption occurring outside its borders. Sectoral analyses suggest that while organic farming and energy efficiency schemes offer some reductions, the most significant potential for lowering the EF lies in dietary changes, a shift toward renewable energy (particularly wind), and aggressive demand management in transport.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed two proposals to increase the Texas Renewable Energy Standard (RPS): a 20 percent by 2020 target (TREIA proposal) and a 10,000 MW by 2025 target (TEPC proposal). Using the EIA's National Energy Modeling System, the analysis found that both proposals would lower consumer energy bills, create jobs, and reduce CO2 emissions, with the 20 percent proposal yielding significantly higher benefits. By 2025, the 20 percent standard is projected to save consumers $5.6 billion in total energy bills, create 38,290 new jobs, and reduce annual power plant CO2 emissions by 20 million metric tons.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed two proposals to increase the Texas Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). The more aggressive 20 percent by 2020 proposal would result in 17,820 MW of renewable capacity by 2025, creating 38,290 new jobs and saving consumers $5.6 billion in energy bills. The more modest 10,000 MW by 2025 proposal would yield approximately 8 percent renewable energy by 2025, creating 19,950 new jobs and $5.5 billion in consumer savings. Both proposals would diversify the electricity mix by displacing natural gas and coal, reducing CO2 emissions and providing significant capital investment and tax revenues to rural Texas communities.