Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies four primary drivers of resource adequacy risk in the Western United States: load growth uncertainties, extreme weather and climate change, delays in planned resource builds, and slow transmission expansion. To mitigate these risks, it proposes ten specific options for regulators categorized into three strategies: improving planning practices, widening the suite of resource adequacy solutions, and reforming utility business models.

The document highlights a significant gap in clean energy investment for emerging and developing economies (EMDEs), noting that only 15% of global investment reaches these regions (excluding China). It identifies the primary barrier as an elevated cost of capital—often two to three times higher than in OECD countries—driven by risks such as currency exchange, regulatory uncertainty, and asset expropriation. In Africa, the weighted average cost of capital for power sector projects is 15.6%, making decarbonization prohibitively expensive. The authors argue that COP29 must move beyond pledges toward granular, data-driven plans and bottom-up actions that improve local infrastructure and market performance to make EMDEs more attractive to risk-averse private capital.

The document contends that the U.S. power grid is already transitioning away from coal toward renewables, storage, and flexible natural gas due to market forces, and that the EPA's Rule aligns with these trends. It argues that modern resources like battery storage and flexible gas plants provide better operational reliability than aging coal plants. The brief asserts that the Rule provides sufficient time for resource procurement and includes flexibility mechanisms to protect the grid during periods of stress.

The document analyzes Colombia's electricity balance through 2038, finding that while average energy supply remains sufficient, 'firm energy' (reliable capacity) faces deficits as early as 2029 depending on the coal phase-out scenario. To avoid these deficits, the report argues for significantly accelerating renewable energy deployment, improving transmission infrastructure, and implementing energy storage to replace the high reliability of coal plants.

The document evaluates three industry-proposed methods for reducing carbon emissions from gas plants: hydrogen cofiring, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and biomethane. It concludes that these approaches often fail to achieve targeted emissions reductions when full life cycle impacts—such as upstream methane leakage, energy penalties, and production emissions—are considered. Furthermore, the brief argues that these technologies perpetuate environmental and social inequities by maintaining the operation of gas plants. In contrast, the report finds that transitioning to renewable energy sources like wind and solar provides superior reductions in carbon, air, and water pollution while offering lower costs and fewer land-use impacts.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) analysis indicates that reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through increased transportation choices could save the U.S. up to $201 billion in energy infrastructure and $5.9 trillion in vehicle ownership costs by 2050. The report contends that current car dependence is driven by industry lobbying from the auto, fossil fuel, and road-building sectors, which receive over 75 percent of transportation spending. UCS recommends investing in diverse transportation networks, applying equity and climate lenses to project prioritization, and making planning processes more democratic to benefit the 30 percent of Americans who do not drive.

The document challenges the narrative that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is the main cause of infrastructure delays, citing research that points instead to lack of agency resources and poor coordination. It suggests that rather than dismantling NEPA, policymakers should focus on increasing agency funding, harmonizing state and federal processes, and improving community engagement.

The report finds that Alberta can almost completely decarbonize its electricity generation within the next decade using wind, solar, and gas with carbon capture. While federal Clean Electricity Regulations are a point of political contention, modelling suggests they have little impact on the long-term supply mix compared to the massive projected growth in electricity demand driven by industrial electrification. The transition's success depends on scaling up transmission infrastructure and maintaining policy stability to attract private investment.

The report concludes that Alberta has the natural resources and capacity to decarbonize its electricity production almost completely within the next decade. It highlights a transition dominated by wind, solar, and natural gas with carbon capture and storage (CCS), while noting that the primary challenge is not land availability but the expansion of transmission infrastructure to meet a potentially doubling demand for electricity driven by industrial electrification.

The briefing analyzes how the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 (EPRA) and FERC Order 1920 could accelerate US transmission expansion to 2–4 TW-miles per year. By enabling the deployment of clean energy to meet growing electricity demand and displace fossil fuel generation, these provisions are estimated to reduce cumulative US grid emissions by 6.5 Gt CO2e through 2050. The analysis focuses on four key EPRA sections addressing interregional planning, FERC permitting, categorical exclusions, and legal decision timelines.

The report identifies 2023 as the likely peak for global power sector emissions, forecasting a decline in 2024 driven by record solar and wind additions. While electricity demand is expected to rise due to electrification, data centres, and air conditioning, the growth of clean energy is projected to outpace this demand. The document highlights that tripling renewable capacity by 2030 could halve power sector emissions. It also provides case studies of China, Brazil, and the Netherlands to demonstrate how high-level ambition, incentive mechanisms, and the removal of technical barriers can accelerate the transition regardless of geographic or economic starting points.

The report asserts that Western US states must collaborate on regional electricity transmission expansion to realize significant economic gains. It highlights that energy export states could see their market access grow from $3 billion to $40 billion per year by 2050 with increased capacity, while states with clean energy standards could reduce costs by over 30% through expansive regional planning.

The policy brief highlights a disconnect between European transmission system operator (TSO) grid plans and actual energy policy targets or market outlooks. It argues that current regulatory requirements, which force TSOs to rely on outdated national legislation, lead to under-planned capacity and increased grid congestion. The author recommends that the European Commission provide guidance on anticipatory planning and that national regulators expand their oversight to assess the adequacy of grid plans beyond mere cost implications.

The report argues that reconductoring existing transmission lines with advanced conductors can rapidly increase grid capacity and reduce costs, but is hindered by utility incentive structures, rigid equipment standards, and planning gaps. It recommends aligning utility incentives, updating regional planning horizons, establishing efficiency standards, and expanding federal funding and workforce training to overcome these hurdles.

The briefing outlines a three-pronged strategy to modernize the US power grid to accommodate increasing electricity demand from data centers, manufacturing, and electric vehicles. It advocates for 'Big Wires' (high-voltage transmission and grid-enhancing technologies), 'Small Wires' (distribution upgrades for diffuse loads like EVs), and 'Non-Wires' solutions (virtual power plants) to ensure a reliable and affordable transition to a fully electrified economy.

The report analyzes the federal permitting process for high-capacity electric transmission lines in the U.S., identifying systemic delays caused by poor interagency coordination, capacity shortages, and regulatory misalignment between federal and state authorities. Based on a dataset of 37 projects and case studies, it argues that while litigation is often cited as a primary barrier, it is rarely the sole cause of project failure. The authors recommend that the President prioritize transmission as a national priority, that Congress consolidate siting authority for multi-state projects, and that agencies adopt more agile, transparent, and collaborative environmental review processes, including expanded use of programmatic EISs and categorical exclusions.

The report finds that many European national transmission grid plans are based on under-ambitious energy scenarios that lag behind current policy targets and market trends, particularly for solar power. This misalignment risks creating grid bottlenecks that could hinder the deployment of renewables by 2030. While there is a trend toward increasing grid expansion and the adoption of 'non-wire solutions' to alleviate congestion, the report argues that political prioritization and regulatory reform are needed to ensure infrastructure keeps pace with the accelerating energy transition.

The report argues that Poland requires a diverse technological portfolio—including wind, solar, nuclear, and carbon capture—to decarbonise its power system by 2050. Modelling of 19 scenarios indicates that relying on a narrow set of technologies increases system costs and infrastructure needs, while a 'base' scenario suggests a rapid transition involving a massive build-out of onshore wind and the introduction of nuclear power to replace coal.

The report analyzes transmission development between 2010 and 2020, finding that while projects requiring an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) represent only 3.5% of new lines, they account for 26% of new line miles. These projects are typically longer, more likely to be driven by renewable generation interconnection, and more likely to cross state or international borders. The average EIS review timeline is 4.3 years, with a moderate correlation between line length and review duration. The authors argue that these long and unpredictable timelines pose a challenge to future grid reliability and decarbonization goals, especially as federal funding and authority increase the likelihood of projects triggering federal reviews.

The report argues that South Africa must move beyond linear thinking and 'energy blindness' to embrace systems and futures thinking for its energy transition. It identifies critical leverage points—ranging from infrastructure and regulatory reform to paradigm shifts in economic growth—to avoid energy poverty and social unrest. The framework outlines four strategic priorities: championing cross-border collaboration for energy democracies, practicing active non-alignment in renewable energy diplomacy, challenging 'used' (borrowed) energy futures, and transitioning from growth-centric economic models to anticipatory energy governance.