Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines the uneven progress of carbon pricing in Asia, contrasting the advanced emissions trading systems (ETS) in Japan and South Korea with the early-stage designs in Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines. It argues that while the EU CBAM poses a financial risk to exporters—particularly in the steel sector—the overall impact is limited and can be mitigated by implementing effective domestic carbon pricing and transitioning to cleaner production technologies. The document provides specific fee estimates for each country and recommends phasing out carbon offsets, implementing absolute emission caps, and shifting toward the auctioning of allowances to drive genuine decarbonisation.

The report argues that carbon pricing is a vital but insufficient tool for climate action and must be integrated into a broader policy mix. It advocates for absolute emission caps, the elimination of free allowances, and the reinvestment of revenues into public climate benefits. The document strongly warns against the use of carbon offsets and credits, which it claims undermine environmental integrity and allow polluters to avoid real reductions. It also addresses the 'carbon leakage' myth, suggesting that the risks are often overestimated and used to justify policies that lock in polluting industries.

A coalition of environmental organizations calls on the chair of the Environment Council to increase the ambition of the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) and ensure robust accounting for land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF). The authors argue that the current ESR proposal is inconsistent with the Paris Agreement and propose specific reforms, including higher emission reduction targets, the removal of forestry and ETS loopholes, and the implementation of stricter governance and compliance mechanisms.

The report by Carbon Market Watch outlines a framework for 'carbon pricing done right,' arguing that such systems must be integrated into broader policy packages and based on strict emission caps to be effective. It emphasizes the 'polluter pays principle,' warning against free allocations and offsets, which it claims can weaken price signals and lead to greenwashing. The document advocates for transparency, the reinvestment of revenues into climate action and vulnerable communities, and a cautious approach to carbon leakage and border adjustment mechanisms to avoid protectionism while ensuring climate justice.

The report by Carbon Market Watch provides a framework for implementing 'right' carbon pricing, arguing that such systems must be integrated into a broader policy mix, feature declining emission caps, and avoid loopholes like free allocations and carbon offsets. It emphasizes the need for transparency, the reinvestment of revenues into climate action and vulnerable communities, and the use of carbon border adjustments to prevent leakage while maintaining equity.

The signatories support improving demand information and early auctions for ETS2 to increase credibility and investment. However, they oppose weakening MSR2 release conditions or extending its lifetime, arguing these measures would increase total emissions and undermine EU climate targets and the Effort Sharing Regulation. Instead, they advocate for complementary policies to reduce emissions demand, such as clean technology subsidies and the fair distribution of revenues via the Social Climate Fund.

A coalition of 73 organizations argues that California's 2022 Draft Scoping Plan fails to accelerate climate targets or increase the pace of action beyond existing commitments. The group proposes a comprehensive set of revisions, including phasing out oil extraction by 2035 and refining by 2045, banning new gas-fired power generation immediately, and achieving a zero-carbon electric sector by 2035. They also call for a 30% reduction in vehicle miles traveled by 2035, a phase-out of new gas appliance sales by 2030, and the limitation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) to only the most essential, hard-to-decarbonize sectors.

The document lists the professional backgrounds of various experts, policymakers, and industry leaders participating in the National Clean Fuels Technology & Health Effects Leadership Forum. The presenters include former diplomats, senators, CEOs of renewable fuel associations, and agricultural specialists, with a strong focus on ethanol, biofuels, and environmental legislation.

Sandbag argues that a standalone UK ETS would be dysfunctional due to its small size and vulnerability to volatility and speculation. The organization recommends that the UK either remain part of the EU ETS or implement a carbon tax with a floor based on the average EU ETS price. Key proposals include expanding carbon pricing to fossil gas and fugitive methane, ending the zero-emissions treatment of large-scale biomass burning, and distributing carbon revenues to citizens as a 'climate dividend'.

The document examines China's balancing act in climate negotiations, where it seeks to maintain economic growth and energy security while transitioning toward a low-carbon economy. While China has implemented ambitious domestic policies to reduce energy intensity—driven largely by a need to decrease dependence on oil and coal imports—it remains cautious about committing to binding international targets that could undermine its development goals or subject its internal affairs to international verification. The briefing highlights the critical role of the US-China relationship and the necessity of financial and technical support from developed nations to accelerate China's emission peak.

The report argues that environmental improvements can enhance competitiveness and proposes a strategy for a European eco-efficient economy based on resource efficiency, new technology markets, and stable global carbon pricing. It emphasizes the need for integrated governance, support for SMEs, and international cooperation to prevent carbon leakage and drive global climate action.

The document examines the role of carbon offsets in climate policy, highlighting their ability to reduce mitigation costs and provide sustainability co-benefits. However, it identifies significant risks including additionality, permanence, leakage, and quantification errors. Through a 'road test' of various protocols, the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) demonstrates that the amount of offsets credited for the same project can vary by a factor of 2 or more. The brief recommends that offsets be used as transitional tools and that protocols be standardized to ensure consistent calculation of emission reduction credits.

The report analyzes the 'technological innovation system' (TIS) for solar PV and CCS, contrasting the EU's market-pull approach with the US's R&D-push focus. While solar PV has seen rapid growth and falling costs, it faces risks from fluctuating European subsidies. CCS is stalled in the 'valley of death' due to high capital requirements for large-scale demonstration and a lack of long-term climate policy, particularly in the US.

This report outlines a national strategy for the United States to transition to a clean energy economy to mitigate global warming. It proposes a combination of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and a cap-and-trade program to achieve significant emissions reductions. The analysis emphasizes the necessity of meeting specific targets by 2020 and 2030 to avoid the most severe climate impacts, while highlighting the potential for these transitions to spur economic growth and job creation.

The Union of Concerned Scientists developed the Climate 2030 Blueprint using a modified version of the National Energy Modeling System (UCS-NEMS) to evaluate a 'Blueprint case' against a 'Reference case'. The Blueprint case centers on a cap-and-trade program starting in 2011, designed to reduce U.S. emissions to 26 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 56 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. This cap is supported by complementary policies in energy efficiency, electricity generation, and transportation to lower the overall cost of compliance. The analysis incorporates supplemental data on building and industrial efficiency from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy and biomass supply curves from the University of Tennessee and Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

The report proposes a U.S. cap-and-trade system to limit global warming emissions, citing the success of the 1990 Acid Rain Program. It outlines design criteria including a stringent declining cap, full auctioning of allowances, and the inclusion of all major heat-trapping gases. The author emphasizes that while cap-and-trade is a lynchpin, it must be paired with parallel sector-based policies to be effective.

The Climate 2030 Blueprint proposes a combination of a cap-and-trade program and sector-specific complementary policies to reduce U.S. heat-trapping emissions. The analysis indicates that by 2030, the Blueprint could achieve a 56 percent drop in emissions from 2005 levels while generating net annual savings of $464 billion for consumers and businesses. The electricity sector is identified as the primary driver of these reductions, with significant contributions from energy efficiency and renewable energy. The report also highlights improvements in energy security through reduced oil imports and the potential for carbon sequestration in U.S. forests and farmlands.

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 analyzes the U.S. transportation sector's contribution to global warming, noting it is the second-largest source of emissions, primarily driven by light-duty vehicles. It proposes a three-pronged approach: improving vehicle and air conditioning efficiency, transitioning to low-carbon fuels (such as cellulosic biofuels, electricity, and hydrogen), and reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through smart growth and transit expansion. The report details specific fuel economy targets for 2020 and 2030 and advocates for performance-based emission standards over traditional fuel economy standards to better account for non-CO2 emissions and alternative fuels.

The document describes a modeled U.S. cap-and-trade program starting in 2011, aiming to reduce emissions to 3,145 MMTCO2eq by 2030. It outlines the coverage of six major greenhouse gases across multiple sectors, the use of domestic and international offsets, and the mechanisms for banking and withdrawing allowances. The report also discusses the macroeconomic assumptions of the UCS-NEMS model, including revenue recycling and the impact on GDP, and provides a detailed methodology for calculating REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) supply curves for international offsets.