Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the Java 9 and 10 Coal Power Plant (CPP) projects in Cilegon, Banten, funded by South Korean institutions including K-Exim, KDB, and K-Sure. It argues the investment is 'forced' and 'unprofitable,' citing a KDI pre-feasibility study showing a negative NPV for KEPCO. The document highlights severe health impacts in Banten, where Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI) is prevalent, and notes that the projects exacerbate air pollution and increase vulnerability to pandemics like Covid-19. It further criticizes the use of Ultra Super Critical (USC) technology as insufficient for carbon reduction and points to the risk of natural disasters, such as tsunamis, given the plants' coastal locations. The report concludes that the investment violates South Korea's 'Green New Deal' and calls for the Indonesian government to cancel the projects in favor of renewable energy.

The report identifies the 'Toxic Twenty' coal-fired power plants in Indonesia, estimating that between 2026 and 2050, they will cause 156,000 premature deaths and USD 109 billion in health-related economic losses. It argues that these plants create a net economic drain, reducing regional GDP and destroying livelihoods in agriculture and fisheries, while criticizing the government's reliance on 'false solutions' like biomass co-firing to extend the life of fossil fuel infrastructure.

The report critiques the implementation of biomass co-firing in West Java's coal power plants, specifically PLTU Indramayu and PLTU Pelabuhan Ratu. It argues that the program facilitates 'false' carbon neutrality claims while causing significant deforestation, land conflicts, and ecological damage. The authors highlight a gap between national energy targets and the reality of biomass sourcing, which often relies on illegal logging or 'fraudulent' practices by Perhutani, rather than sustainable energy forests (HTE).

The document criticizes the Indonesian government's push for B50 and Bioethanol (E20) as a response to Middle East oil supply crises. It claims these policies will lead to massive deforestation, carbon emission increases, and the 'whitewashing' of illegal palm oil plantations. The author asserts that the program benefits conglomerates and creates trade dependency on the US, proposing instead a shift toward public transportation to reduce fuel demand.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzes a proposal to increase Illinois's RPS to 35% by 2030 and its EEPS to a 20% reduction in electricity demand by 2025. Using the DOE's ReEDS model, the report finds that these strengthened standards would drive $23 billion in clean energy investment, save consumers $12.1 billion in electricity expenditures through 2030, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 9.3% compared to a scenario with no policies.

The document evaluates the EIPC's Carbon Reduction Scenario, which aims to reduce carbon emissions in the Eastern Interconnection by 42% below 2005 levels by 2030. Analysis by Synapse Energy Economics indicates that this scenario achieves these reductions with cumulative ratepayer costs through 2040 nearly identical to a 'Business-as-Usual' approach. The scenario relies on a combination of wind energy, energy efficiency, and expanded interregional transmission, specifically projecting 103 GW of new wind in MISO states to support the broader region. The report argues that regional cooperation and updated, lower costs for wind and solar make these targets highly achievable and potentially 30% cheaper than business-as-usual when carbon costs are valued uniformly.

The report identifies energy efficiency as the most cost-effective strategy for cutting U.S. carbon emissions, focusing on the industrial and building sectors which together account for two-thirds of U.S. carbon emissions. It details technical opportunities such as combined-heat-and-power (CHP) systems, building envelope improvements, and high-efficiency appliances. The document proposes a 'Blueprint' of policies—including efficiency standards, resource standards (EERS), and updated building codes—that could reduce total U.S. energy consumption by 29 percent by 2030. It highlights that while technical potential is high, barriers such as 'split incentives' and high up-front costs persist, requiring coordinated federal and state intervention.

The report argues that the United States can technologically and economically achieve deep emission cuts through a multi-pronged strategy. Central to this is a cap-and-trade system with auctioned allowances, which would fund clean energy investments and international forest preservation. The strategy includes implementing energy efficiency resource standards, a national renewable electricity standard of 25% by 2025, and tougher vehicle emission caps. Internationally, it emphasizes the cost-effectiveness of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) in tropical nations. The author asserts that the nation can reduce emissions by at least 35% below 2005 levels by 2020 through domestic action and international funding.

The document argues that the costs of failing to reduce carbon emissions in the United States are prohibitive, citing projected damages to coastal infrastructure, public health, water resources, agriculture, transportation, and energy systems. It highlights that under high-emissions scenarios, the annual economic impact could reach 1.9 percent of GDP by 2100. Specific regional risks include severe sea-level rise in Florida and the Northeast, extreme heat waves in Midwestern cities, water scarcity in the Southwest, and increased wildfire frequency in the West Coast and Rocky Mountain regions. The document advocates for a reduction of carbon emissions by at least 80 percent from 2005 levels by 2050 to avoid the worst consequences.

The document outlines conservative estimates for biomass energy supply in the US, focusing on energy crops, agricultural residues, forestry residues, and urban/mill residues. It details the use of the POLYSYS model to assess land-use changes, specifically for switchgrass, and provides the methodology for calculating land-use impacts for other renewable energy technologies and avoided coal mining.

The Union of Concerned Scientists outlines ten primary ways to lower personal carbon emissions and financial costs, ranging from improving vehicle fuel economy and home energy efficiency to dietary changes and reduced consumption. A final recommendation emphasizes the collective impact of these actions, stating that a 20 percent emission reduction by all Americans could lead to the closure of 200 of the 600 coal plants in the United States.

The document details the construction of the EW3 database, which integrates 2008 Energy Information Administration (EIA) data with NREL and Argonne National Laboratory water coefficients to estimate freshwater withdrawals and consumption. It describes the process of mapping cooling systems to specific generators, using Google Earth to verify cooling types, and applying the Water Supply Stress Index (WaSSI) to identify watersheds where electricity generation significantly increases water stress. The methodology also covers the projection of water use through 2036 using the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model and the calculation of water and carbon intensities for the top 15 U.S. electricity providers.

The Union of Concerned Scientists identifies a range of 153 to 353 coal-fired generating units in the U.S. that are economically uncompetitive and should be retired. These units, totaling up to 59 GW of capacity, are typically older, underutilized, and lack modern pollution controls. The report argues that retiring these units, alongside 288 already scheduled for closure, would not jeopardize grid reliability and could reduce annual CO2 emissions by 245 to 410 million tons if replaced by natural gas, renewables, or energy efficiency.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) analysis reveals that the majority of money spent on gasoline in the U.S. flows to oil companies rather than local communities. For a typical $50 fill-up, $33 goes toward crude oil, with $20 benefiting private and publicly traded companies and $13 benefiting government-run entities. The report argues that individual shareholders receive negligible returns from their own gasoline expenditures; for example, a person with $1 million in a balanced portfolio would earn less than a penny in stock returns from spending $1,700 annually on gas from ExxonMobil. Conversely, investing in fuel-efficient vehicles, such as a hybrid Ford Fusion, can result in lifetime savings of over $5,000. On a national scale, UCS estimates that federal fuel economy standards for 2017-2025 could provide consumers $50 billion in net savings by 2030 and create between 484,000 and 570,000 jobs. The document concludes that reducing oil use is essential to mitigate global warming, as transportation accounts for more than one-third of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists finds that increasing Wisconsin's renewable electricity standard to 25% by 2025 is achievable and affordable. Under the most likely 'No Hydro Imports' scenario, the state would see a $59 million reduction in electricity bills (when accounting for carbon savings), the creation of 2,650 new jobs, and a reduction in CO2 emissions equivalent to removing 2.1 million cars from the road. The analysis highlights Wisconsin's significant technical potential in wind, solar, and biomass to meet these targets while reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels.

The We Mean Business coalition argues that corporate climate leadership is essential for long-term business success and global economic resilience. It defines leadership as the combination of science-based ambition, transformative business action, and pro-change policy advocacy, emphasizing that current levels of corporate action are insufficient to ensure a sustainable future.

Indian companies are investing heavily in energy efficiency to combat high energy prices and meet regulatory requirements. Data from CDP shows that between 2012 and 2013, companies invested nearly $1 billion in over 200 projects, achieving an average internal rate of return (IRR) of 12.7%. Key investments include industrial process improvements and heat recovery systems, with the latter yielding a 30% IRR. Government initiatives like the Perform, Achieve and Trade (PAT) scheme are significant drivers, with 50% of CDP-surveyed companies citing the scheme as a key strategic driver. The report highlights that adopting low-carbon technologies could reduce India's projected 2050 emissions from 7.8 GtCO2 to 2.4 GtCO2, though this would require annual investments between $200 billion and $400 billion.

WRI analysis indicates that Pennsylvania can reduce its power plant CO2 emissions by 21 percent below 2011 levels by 2020 using existing policies and infrastructure. This would meet or exceed moderately ambitious EPA standards, which are estimated to require reductions between 22 and 31 percent. Key opportunities include meeting alternative energy and energy efficiency targets, increasing the use of combined heat and power (CHP) and natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants, and improving coal plant efficiency.

The Land Emissions and Removals Navigator (LEARN) is a free, interactive web tool designed to help U.S. cities, counties, and municipalities analyze the greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of forests and trees at a community scale. Developed by the World Resources Institute, ICLEI, and partners, the tool provides automated spatial analysis to support data-driven planning and monitoring of nature-based solutions. It utilizes national datasets from the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Geological Survey to estimate carbon emissions and removals resulting from land cover change, forest disturbances, and changes to tree canopy on non-forest lands. The tool is intended to complement ICLEI's U.S. Community Protocol’s Appendix J: Forests and Trees to assist local leaders in aligning their actions with state and national mitigation targets.

The document serves as a resource for investors worldwide, offering explanations and resources on the reality of human-caused climate change, the nature of climate-related financial risks, and strategies for portfolio management such as screening and rebalancing.