Search Climate Insights Directory

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) has identified significant discrepancies in the National Air Quality Officer's (NAQO) decisions regarding Eskom's applications for postponement of minimum emission standards (MES). The CER highlights inconsistencies between the postponement periods and emission limits sought by Eskom and those actually granted, as well as a lack of clear commencement dates for certain standards. Specifically, the CER notes that for several power stations, the NAQO appears to have granted open-ended postponements for SO2 emissions 'until decommissioning' or implicitly granted 2020 MES postponements that were not explicitly requested. The document seeks formal clarification on these administrative inconsistencies to advise environmental justice organisations and impacted community groups.

The report analyzes how three major groups of American Christians perceive climate change and its solutions. It finds that while beliefs about whether global warming is occurring vary by denomination—with Catholics showing the highest agreement and evangelicals being the most split—there is broad cross-denominational support for renewable energy policies and a shared moral value regarding the stewardship of nature.

The document argues that the current 75 ppb ozone standard is insufficient to protect public health, particularly for sensitive populations like children and asthmatics. It advocates for a 60 ppb primary standard based on scientific evidence of lung function decrements and inflammation at that level. It also calls for a separate secondary standard of 7 ppm-hrs using the W126 metric to protect vegetation and ecosystems, specifically in Class I areas.

The report finds that while majorities of Catholics and non-evangelical Protestants believe global warming is happening and human-caused, evangelicals are more split. There is broad support across all three groups for renewable energy research and infrastructure resilience, though evangelicals are more likely to prioritize religious beliefs over scientific explanations when they conflict. Pope Francis is identified as the most trusted religious leader on the issue, despite low general awareness of his forthcoming climate encyclical.

The document details the calculations used to estimate the CO2-equivalent emissions resulting from natural gas leakage in the United States. Based on 2012 production data and a leakage range of 1% to 9%, the analysis converts methane volume to mass and then to CO2 equivalents, using a potency factor of 34. These results are then compared to the annual emissions of typical 600-megawatt coal power plants to illustrate the climate risk.

The document describes the four primary components of the US electricity grid: individual generators, transmission lines, distribution networks, and consumer load. It details the technical differences between power sources, such as the low flexibility of coal and nuclear plants compared to the rapid ramping of natural gas plants. The text outlines the regulatory roles of state Public Utility Commissions (PUCs) and the federal Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and notes the three main US transmission networks: the Western Interconnection, the Eastern Interconnection, and ERCOT. It also traces the grid's history from the victory of alternating current (AC) over direct current (DC) to the 'restructuring' of the 1970s that allowed for wholesale competition. Finally, it identifies potential improvements through energy storage, smart meters, and distributed generation like residential solar panels.

The study reveals a divided Republican electorate, where moderate and liberal Republicans are significantly more likely to believe global warming is occurring and support carbon dioxide regulation than conservative and Tea Party Republicans. Despite these divisions, a majority of all Republicans support tax rebates for energy-efficient vehicles and solar panels, including a majority of conservatives.

The study reveals a divided Republican electorate, where moderate and liberal Republicans are significantly more likely to acknowledge global warming and support carbon dioxide regulations and energy-efficient tax rebates than conservative or Tea Party Republicans.

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that increasing Minnesota's renewable energy standard to 40 percent by 2030 would drive over $6 billion in new capital investments and reduce reliance on imported electricity without significantly impacting retail rates. The analysis indicates that such a policy would increase wind capacity to nearly 6,000 MW and utility-scale solar to over 600 MW by 2030. While a strengthened RES helps position the state to comply with the EPA's Clean Power Plan, the report notes that coal would still provide 38 percent of electricity in 2030 without additional policy actions. The authors recommend combining the strengthened RES with an increased energy efficiency standard of 2 percent annually by 2020.

The report finds that while Democrats are more likely than Republicans to believe in human-caused global warming and support climate action, liberal and moderate Republicans often align with the mainstream public. Conservative Republicans remain the primary group opposed to climate action and skeptical of global warming. There is broad cross-party support for renewable energy research and tax rebates for energy-efficient products, though significant divisions persist regarding carbon taxes and emission limits on coal plants.

The policy brief defines carbon lock-in as the process where investments in carbon-intensive technologies and institutions make shifting to low-carbon pathways more difficult and expensive. It introduces a four-step methodology for policy-makers to assess lock-in risk: defining the context, identifying investments inconsistent with climate goals (using 'over-committed emissions' and 'over-production' metrics), assessing the strength of the lock-in (via equipment lifetime and capital intensity), and considering techno-institutional effects. Applying this globally for the period 2015–2030, the brief identifies coal-fired power plants as the highest risk on the demand side, committing 180 Gt CO2 beyond a 2°C pathway. On the supply side, capital-intensive offshore oil and gas platforms are highlighted as significant risks due to high capital and rent intensities. The author recommends that policy-makers move beyond merely promoting low-carbon technologies to actively restricting high-carbon investments through stringent codes, moratoria, and the use of shadow carbon prices.

The statement criticizes developed nations, specifically Japan, for using climate finance to fund coal-fired power plants in developing countries like Indonesia. It highlights a lack of coherent rules for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and argues that current international climate agreements, including the US-China deal, are insufficient and non-binding. The author demands that climate finance be restricted to renewable energy and that developed countries fulfill their 'climate debt' through public finance and technology transfers.

A survey by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication reveals that 67% of Americans support strict CO2 emission limits on existing coal-fired power plants, even with potential electricity cost increases. The data also shows strong public support for infrastructure resilience (83%), renewable energy research (77%), energy-efficient vehicle/solar tax rebates (77%), and the regulation of carbon dioxide as a pollutant (75%). Additionally, 66% of respondents believe global warming is occurring, reflecting a slight increase from November 2013.

The author refutes the argument that the EPA cannot regulate greenhouse gases from existing power plants because those plants are already required to control air toxics. The author asserts that section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act specifically allows for the regulation of "gap" pollutants—those that are neither National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) nor Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS)—and that the Senate's version of the 1990 amendments, which is the controlling law, confirms this authority.

The letter argues that Sasol and Natref's court application to set aside air pollution regulations threatens public health and environmental rights, particularly in the Vaal Triangle and Highveld Priority Areas. The signatories contend that Sasol's high profitability makes its claims of prohibitive compliance costs immoral and that granting exemptions would set a dangerous precedent for other polluters, including Eskom.

The October 2014 survey reveals that while 66% of Americans believe global warming is occurring, only 50% attribute it to human activities. Public concern remains relatively steady, with only 33% believing people in the U.S. are currently being harmed. Despite this, there is broad support for increased action from corporations (67%), citizens (63%), and various levels of government, as well as specific policies like infrastructure improvements (83%) and carbon dioxide emission limits on coal plants (67%).

The October 2014 survey 'Climate Change in the American Mind' reveals that while 66% of Americans believe global warming is happening, there is a significant gap between public perception and scientific consensus regarding its causes. Only 50% of respondents believe human activities are the primary cause, and only 33% believe people in the U.S. are currently being harmed. Despite this, there is broad support for clean energy research, carbon dioxide regulation, and infrastructure improvements to resist extreme weather, with majorities believing that corporations, citizens, and government officials should do more to address the issue.

The policy brief analyzes the effectiveness of coal-fired electricity regulations in Canada and the United States. It finds that the U.S. approach, which targets the broader electricity sector and existing plants, will deliver significantly higher national emission reductions by 2020 and 2030 than the Canadian approach, which focuses on new plants and those reaching the end of their useful life. Despite these policies, neither country is projected to meet its Copenhagen Accord target of a 17% reduction in emissions by 2020 relative to 2005 levels.

The report finds that registered voters are significantly more likely to support political candidates who favor action to reduce global warming and are more likely to vote against those who oppose such action. While a strong divide exists between Democrats and Republicans, there is a notable split within the Republican Party, with liberal/moderate Republicans sharing more similarities with moderate/conservative Democrats than with conservative Republicans on issues such as the occurrence of global warming, levels of concern, and support for carbon dioxide emission limits on coal-fired power plants.

The author argues that South Africa's economic growth is hindered by energy constraints, untenable industrial relations, and low private investment. While the president's address identifies these pressures, the author contends that powerful vested interests and parastatal red tape block necessary structural changes, such as the Independent System Market Operator (ISMO) Bill and the Independent Power Producers (IPP) Programme. The text criticizes the reliance on coal-fired mega projects and a costly nuclear fleet programme, suggesting that greater IPP procurement is a more efficient way to diversify the energy mix. Additionally, it calls for institutional changes to the Labour Relations Act to democratise industrial relations and warns that social interventions in mining communities must be balanced with efforts to attract private investment to revitalise the sector.