Search Climate Insights Directory

The study finds that new coal-fired power plants are not necessary to meet South Africa's electricity demand at the lowest cost and that their inclusion would substantially increase both system costs and greenhouse gas emissions. Using the South African Times Model (SATIM), the authors demonstrate that a least-cost build plan relies on wind, solar PV, and gas, while the coal IPPs would create a generation surplus and potentially accelerate Eskom's financial crisis. The report highlights that the emissions from these plants would almost entirely offset the savings from the National Energy Efficiency Strategy or the carbon tax, complicating South Africa's ability to meet its Paris Agreement commitments.

In 2017, renewables generated 30% of Europe's electricity for the first time, with wind, solar, and biomass overtaking coal generation. However, overall EU greenhouse gas emissions rose by approximately 1% due to increasing electricity consumption and a significant drop in hydro generation, which was the lowest this century. While Western European nations like the Netherlands, Italy, and Portugal announced coal phase-outs, Eastern European countries continued to rely on coal. The report also highlights the impact of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) reforms and the ongoing negotiations of the Clean Energy for All Europeans package.

The European power sector saw a record increase in renewables generation in 2015, yet CO2 emissions fell by only an estimated 0.5% due to offsetting increases in coal generation in several countries and a rebound in electricity demand. While the UK experienced a collapse in coal generation, this was countered by growth in the Netherlands, Spain, and Poland. The report forecasts a further 21% drop in EU ETS emissions from 2014 to 2020, suggesting the EU is on track to surpass its 20% economy-wide CO2 cut target.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of offshore wind energy as of early 2016, contrasting the advanced capacity in Europe with the nascent industry in the United States. It details the technical advantages of offshore wind over onshore wind, such as stronger and more consistent winds and proximity to coastal population centers. The text outlines U.S. government initiatives, including Department of Energy funding and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management leasing, while highlighting the United Kingdom, Germany, and Denmark as global leaders. It also discusses the economic impact of the sector, specifically the 'additional employment effect' in European ports and shipyards.

The document highlights that Europe dominates the global offshore wind market, holding over 90% of installed capacity as of 2015, led by the United Kingdom, Germany, and Denmark. In contrast, the United States is in the early stages of development, with its first commercial farm at Block Island scheduled for late 2016. Despite this gap, the U.S. possesses significant potential, estimated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at over 4,000 GW. The report details U.S. federal initiatives, including Department of Energy funding and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management leasing, and projects U.S. capacity to reach 22 GW by 2030. It also examines the economic benefits of offshore wind, such as higher job creation per megawatt compared to onshore wind and the 'sea breeze effect' that aligns power generation with peak demand.

The policy brief argues that current carbon pricing mechanisms, which use free allowances to prevent carbon leakage in industrial sectors, eliminate the price signal for mitigation beyond primary production efficiency. To address this, the authors propose 'Inclusion of Consumption,' where a consumption charge is levied on carbon-intensive materials (such as steel, aluminum, and clinker) based on benchmark emission values and the carbon price. This charge would apply to all domestic consumption regardless of origin, making it compatible with WTO law. The mechanism would use duty suspension arrangements to track materials through the value chain, with the charge becoming due only when the good is released for consumption. The brief notes precedents in Asia (South Korea, China, Tokyo) regarding electricity consumption and discusses potential implementation in Europe and the United States.

The Beijing Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) reduced CO2 emissions by 4.87 MtCO2 cumulatively between 2013 and 2015, contributing to an earlier emissions peak for the city. The majority of these reductions (98% of power-related cuts) were driven by demand-end management, where companies reduced electricity consumption to meet emission caps, while reductions from power plants within Beijing were negligible. Carbon offsets had no observable impact on allowance prices in the 2014 cycle due to limited supply, particularly of Beijing-originated offsets. The study suggests that a future national ETS should consider including indirect emissions from electricity consumption and implement more stringent caps on direct electricity production to be effective.

The document urges hard goods retailers to drive the adoption of energy-efficient electronics and appliances to save consumers money and reduce electricity demand. It highlights that many products could be significantly more efficient for minimal additional cost, potentially unlocking $34 billion in annual consumer savings by 2040. The author suggests that retailers should develop procurement specifications based on energy data to influence manufacturers, as this approach can be faster and less political than government standards.

The document argues that climate, water, and energy are intricately linked, requiring integrated modeling tools to understand cross-sectoral tradeoffs. To address this, the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) linked its WEAP and LEAP systems. A California case study shows that meeting 5% of Southern California's urban water demand via desalination by 2049 could reduce water imports by 300 million cubic meters per year in normal years, but would increase the water sector's electricity use by approximately 3 TWh and GHG emissions by 1.4 million tonnes of CO2e per year.

The report analyzes the aluminium sector's exposure to carbon leakage, finding that while the sector as a whole is trade-intensive, the risk varies by product. Unwrought non-alloy aluminium is identified as particularly vulnerable due to high trade and CO2 intensity, whereas secondary aluminium and semi-fabricated products pose lower risks. The study highlights a shift in primary production capacity toward China and the Middle East, while the EU27 remains a leader in recycling but continues to export scrap to China.

The report finds that climate change will increase summer cooling demand and decrease winter heating demand in Europe, with the A1B scenario leading to significantly higher costs. While physical energy reductions in heating are larger than cooling increases, the higher cost of electricity for cooling makes the economic impacts more balanced. The study also identifies risks to energy supply, including reduced hydroelectricity generation and lower efficiency for thermal and nuclear power plants due to higher temperatures. Adaptation measures, such as low-energy buildings, are discussed but noted as having a low evidence base for cost-benefit analysis.

The document argues that a national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) is the most cost-effective way to meet new energy needs in Alabama. According to the text, such a standard could save the state $3.6 billion and create over 5,000 new jobs. By 2015, Alabama could reduce electricity consumption by 9%, which would offset approximately 72% of the projected increase in demand. Data for 2020 projections, based on a 15% electricity and 10% natural gas savings target, estimate annual electricity savings of 12,440 GWh, a reduction in peak demand equivalent to 13 power plants of 300 MW, and CO2 emission savings of 9.8 million metric tons.

The document argues that a national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) is the most cost-effective way to meet new energy needs in Florida, potentially saving the state $14 billion and creating nearly 20,000 jobs by 2020.

A national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) in Georgia could save $6.3 billion and create nearly 9,000 jobs by 2020, while reducing electricity consumption by 13% by 2015.

A national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) in Mississippi could save nearly $2 billion and create 2,700 new jobs by 2020, while reducing electricity consumption by 11% by 2015.

The document argues that a national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) is the most cost-effective way to meet new energy needs in North Carolina. By 2015, the state could reduce electricity use by 13%, which would offset approximately 90% of the projected increase in demand. Based on a 2009 ACEEE analysis for 2020 targets (15% for electricity and 10% for natural gas), the implementation of an EERS would result in $3.017 billion in energy savings, the creation of 6,426 net jobs, and a reduction of 11.5 million metric tons of CO2 emissions, alongside annual electricity savings of 13,840 GWh and peak demand savings equivalent to 15 300 MW power plants.

The document argues that a national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) would provide significant benefits to Tennessee, including $3.5 billion in energy savings and the creation of over 5,000 jobs. It highlights that Tennessee could reduce electricity consumption by 11% by 2015, effectively offsetting 100% of the expected increase in demand through efficiency gains, which is identified as the cheapest option for meeting new energy needs.

The document argues that a national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) is the most cost-effective way to meet new energy needs in Virginia. By 2020, such a standard could result in $2.3 billion in energy savings, the creation of over 3,700 jobs, and a reduction of 7.5 million metric tons of CO2 emissions. Additionally, Virginia could reduce electricity consumption by 13% by 2015, which would cover 62% of the projected increase in demand.

The document outlines strategies to lower utility bills and environmental impact by optimizing the use of cleaning appliances. It highlights the significant energy role of water heating, compares the efficiency of different machine types (such as horizontal-axis vs. vertical-axis washers), and suggests behavioral changes like cold-water washing and air-drying. It also introduces advanced technologies like Heat Pump Clothes Dryers and provides a comparison of high-efficiency dishwasher models.

WRI's fiscal year 2002 CO2 emissions were 1,306 metric tons, representing a 3.5% reduction from 2001. The primary emission sources were purchased electricity (42%) and air travel (40%). While air travel emissions have decreased to 1% below 2000 levels, electricity emissions have risen 24% since 2000, largely due to increased cooling requirements from another tenant in WRI's non-separately metered building. WRI has adjusted historical data using improved methodologies and now holds a surplus of carbon offsets. To maintain its commitment, WRI is exploring new ways to fund offsets and has published the 'Working 9 to 5 on Climate Change' guide to help other organizations reduce their footprints.