Search Climate Insights Directory

The study finds that CCS deployment in Germany would lower spot market electricity prices and reduce imports from France, Belgium, and Poland, while increasing producer and consumer surpluses.

The document expresses concerns that carbon credit offsets within the EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS) and the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) undermine domestic emission reductions. It specifically calls for Portugal to prohibit offsets from industrial HFC-23 and N2O emissions, coal-fired power plants in developing countries, large-scale hydropower projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Phase I Joint Implementation (JI) projects due to lack of environmental integrity and transparency.

The letter expresses concern that carbon offsets are undermining EU climate goals by stifling domestic emission reductions and supporting projects that lack environmental integrity. It specifically highlights the negative impacts of coal-fired power plants and large hydro projects in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), as well as the lack of transparency in Track 1 Joint Implementation (JI).

The letter expresses concern that 555 million carbon offset credits were surrendered into the EU ETS between 2008 and 2011, costing an estimated €5.9bn. The signatories argue that offsets stifle domestic reductions, support business-as-usual coal and large hydro projects in the CDM, and allow for 'hot-air laundering' through Track 1 Joint Implementation.

The Clean Air Task Force supports the EPA's proposed new source performance standards (NSPS) for fossil-fueled power plants, which would limit emissions to 1,000 lbs. of CO2 per megawatt-hour. The author asserts that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology is currently available and cost-effective, enabling new coal plants to meet or exceed these standards. The document highlights existing commercial CCS projects and the potential for the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) industry to create commercial demand for captured anthropogenic CO2, providing a hedge against future emissions if natural gas prices rise.

The brief uses the Canadian Integrated Modelling System (CIMS) to evaluate proposed regulations requiring new or modified coal plants to meet a performance standard of 375 g CO2e/kWh. The analysis projects that these regulations would reduce electricity sector emissions by 5 million tonnes (Mt) in 2020 and 20 Mt by 2030, with an average cost of $26 per tonne of GHG reduced. The findings indicate that coal generation would be primarily displaced by natural gas turbines, which are expected to account for 77-78% of the replacement, while carbon capture and storage (CCS) and renewables would play smaller roles.

A joint submission by the Human Rights & Climate Change Working Group and various NGOs calling for the CDM to establish institutional safeguards, strengthen civil society participation, and create grievance mechanisms to address human rights violations associated with carbon offset projects.

The author asserts that setting CO2 performance standards for coal-fired power plants is the primary environmental and energy policy priority for 2012, as these plants are the largest stationary sources of carbon dioxide. While the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule (MATS) and the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) protect public health, they do not reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The document emphasizes that building new plants without carbon controls is unjustifiable and that such standards are necessary for the U.S. to meet its commitment of a 17 percent reduction in emissions below 2005 levels by 2020.

The document argues for the implementation of strict EPA standards on coal-fired power plant emissions, specifically targeting mercury, benzene, and arsenic. It highlights the public health risks of mercury, the ability of many plants to already adopt pollution controls, and the potential for clean energy sources like wind and solar to replace polluting plants.

The document argues that EPA mercury rules will not undermine U.S. electricity system reliability due to regulatory flexibility, available compliance technologies, and sufficient new plant capacity to offset retirements.

The paper examines the EU power sector's transition toward a low-carbon future, highlighting the critical role of the electricity sector in decarbonizing transport and buildings. It identifies significant risks in current investment trends, such as carbon lock-in from new gas and coal plants, and argues that the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fails to provide a credible long-term signal for post-2020 investments. The authors recommend establishing post-2020 emissions caps and calibrating the ETS to ensure carbon scarcity after accounting for energy efficiency and renewable energy objectives.

The report finds that U.S. thermoelectric power plants withdrew between 60 billion and 170 billion gallons of freshwater daily in 2008, with coal plants accounting for the majority of this use. It identifies significant regional disparities in water intensity, noting that plants in the East generally withdraw more water due to a higher prevalence of once-through cooling. The analysis reveals that power plants contributed to water-supply stress in 20% of the 400 stressed watersheds identified. Furthermore, the report highlights critical gaps and inaccuracies in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data, including the total absence of reporting from the nuclear fleet. It argues that climate change and population growth will exacerbate these stresses, urging a shift toward low-water cooling technologies and low-carbon energy sources to ensure grid reliability and ecosystem health.

The report advocates for a 'Reliability-Only Dispatch' mechanism to ensure that coal- and oil-fired power plants granted extensions to comply with the Air Toxics Rule operate only when essential for grid reliability. This approach is proposed as an alternative to 'blanket' one-year extensions requested by industry groups, which the author argues would unnecessarily prolong public exposure to hazardous air pollutants. Modeling of a hypothetical scenario suggests that this targeted dispatch approach could prevent nearly 4,000 premature deaths and save $29 billion in health damages compared to unrestricted extensions for the same units.

The document argues that claims by Texas Governor Rick Perry and Luminant Generation Co. regarding the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) are misleading. It contends that the rule does not jeopardize grid reliability, as new capacity additions would offset coal plant closures and many plants already possess the necessary scrubbers. The briefing further asserts that Texas was properly notified of its inclusion in the sulfur dioxide (SO2) program and that the compliance deadline is March 2013, not January 2012. It concludes that the rule is necessary for public health, estimating that by 2014 it would reduce premature deaths by 13,000-34,000.

The Sierra Club CDM Watch requests that the CDM Executive Board reject the registration of the Guangdong Pinghai Power Plant in China. The authors argue the project is non-additional because it was operational before validation, ultra-supercritical coal technology is already common practice in China, and the project's financial analysis is flawed, failing to consider alternative tariff structures or realistic coal price fluctuations.

Sierra Club CDM Watch requests the CDM Executive Board to reject the registration of Project 4807, asserting that the use of supercritical technology was mandated by the Punjab State Electricity Board and is already the industry standard in India. The authors claim the project is not additional because financing was secured independently of CDM support and that the Validation Report used manipulated cost estimates and an inappropriate baseline to justify the project's economic viability.

Sierra Club CDM Watch submitted a letter to the CDM Executive Board arguing that Project 4629 in India is non-additional. The authors contend that the project would proceed regardless of CDM support because the Government of India mandates supercritical technology and the owner, Reliance Power, has already committed to such technology through a US$10 billion order. They further argue that the project's baseline scenario is flawed, fails to consider energy efficiency alternatives, and uses an unrealistically narrow coal price sensitivity analysis. If registered, the project could receive over 21 million CERs, potentially providing a windfall of approximately €257 million.

The report criticizes the World Bank for its continued funding of coal-fired power plants and large hydropower projects, which it claims lock developing nations into high-carbon futures and cause significant social and environmental harm. It specifically highlights the Medupi plant in South Africa and the Tata Mundra plant in India as examples of 'dirty energy' investment. The document also attacks the Bank's role in expanding carbon markets and REDD schemes, arguing that these mechanisms privatize forests, marginalize Indigenous peoples, and allow rich nations to avoid real emission cuts. Finally, it expresses concern over the Bank's role as the interim trustee of the Green Climate Fund, citing a lack of democratic accountability and a poor track record on social justice.

The Policy-Adjusted IRP 2010-2030 outlines South Africa's strategy for electricity generation expansion and demand-side management. It recommends a diversified energy mix including 9.6 GW of nuclear, 6.3 GW of new coal, and 17.8 GW of renewables (wind, solar PV, and CSP) to balance security of supply, economic growth, and carbon emission constraints. The plan emphasizes accelerating renewable energy to foster local industry and includes a Medium Term Risk Mitigation Project to address anticipated supply shortfalls between 2011 and 2016 through demand response and increased generation availability.

The author contends that coal- and oil-fired power plants have lacked national air toxics regulations for a decade, leading to an 'intolerable situation' for public health and the environment. The text asserts that the EPA's economic benefit analyses are incomplete because they primarily measure particulate matter reductions while ignoring the benefits of reducing carcinogens, heavy metals, and respiratory irritants. It highlights that mercury controls can yield rapid environmental benefits and that some existing sources have already achieved mercury emission reductions of 'upwards of 98% from inlet' with minimal additional investment. The author argues that robust standards, alongside the Clean Air Transport Rule and New Source Performance Standards for greenhouse gases, would drive technological innovation in the energy generation sector.