Search Climate Insights Directory

RMI asserts that while the U.S. federal withdrawal from the Paris Agreement undermines global efforts, the transition to clean energy will continue through the actions of American states, cities, and businesses. The organization highlights the growth of the solar industry and the ability of subnational entities to form an alternative 'societally determined contribution' to maintain climate leadership.

ClientEarth argues that the most effective way to ensure EU 2030 energy and climate targets are met is through binding national targets enshrined in EU law. As an alternative, the organization suggests using non-binding reference values (benchmarks) linked to EU funding incentives to encourage high ambition. The document also recommends strengthening the role of the European Environmental Agency in assessing national plans and clarifying the Commission's enforcement powers when Member States fail to follow recommendations.

The report estimates global fossil fuel subsidies at USD 425 billion and argues that removing consumer subsidies could reduce global carbon emissions by 6 to 8 per cent by 2050. It introduces the "SWAP" framework to transition these funds into sustainable energy and social safety nets, providing specific outlines for Bangladesh, Indonesia, Morocco, and Zambia.

The report finds that while Estonia's building sector is relatively well-controlled due to existing regulations, a 19% further reduction in energy consumption is needed to meet 2030 EU targets. In contrast, the transport sector's energy demand is projected to grow by 18% by 2030 under business-as-usual conditions, failing both national and EU targets. The most effective interventions identified are large-scale building shell renovations and the adoption of fuel-efficient, electric, and hybrid vehicles.

The report details CDKN's work in India to integrate climate change adaptation and mitigation into development planning. Key initiatives include the use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) for energy and building sectors, the development of Heat Action Plans in cities like Ahmedabad, and the promotion of rural electrification through micro-franchising. The document emphasizes the importance of co-benefits, private sector engagement, and gender sensitivity in achieving resilient growth.

The document analyzes two clean energy scenarios for Bangladesh: a short-term 'Clean Energy Policy 1' and a long-term 'Clean Energy Policy 2'. It finds that transitioning to clean energy can significantly reduce emissions, create thousands of jobs, and save lives by reducing air pollution, all while remaining cost-effective relative to conventional fossil fuel generation.

The report finds that while a majority of registered US voters believe global warming is happening and support various clean energy policies, there is a significant gap between their stated willingness to advocate for climate action and their actual behavior. Political affiliation strongly influences beliefs about the cause of global warming and the priority it should hold for government leaders, though broad support exists for renewable energy research and tax rebates for energy-efficient products.

Amory B. Lovins of RMI argues that subsidies for distressed nuclear plants are unjustified because closing high-cost nuclear units and reinvesting their operating expenses into energy efficiency can reduce more carbon than maintaining the plants. He contends that 'baseload' power is not a grid requirement and that variable renewables are more resilient and cost-effective than central thermal plants.

RMI opposes the Protecting Americans from Credit Exploitation bill, which seeks to apply bank and mortgage lending regulations to Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing. RMI contends that PACE is a property assessment, not a mortgage, and that applying mortgage-style regulations would jeopardize its ability to provide affordable financing for energy and water efficiency retrofits. The document advocates for national consumer protection standards tailored to the nature of PACE, citing California's existing regulatory framework as a successful model.

The document outlines 14 key lessons for boosting low-carbon and climate-resilient investment. It highlights the role of fiscal policy in sustainable land use, the importance of government-backed assurances in Power Purchase Agreements to unlock debt finance, and the utility of public-private partnerships like the Global Innovation Lab for Climate Finance to develop bespoke financial instruments. Specific solutions mentioned include currency hedging to reduce renewable energy costs and guarantees for energy efficiency savings.

The GCF Board approved eight funding proposals totaling USD 387.5 million and accredited seven new entities. Key administrative outcomes include the approval of a USD 43.4 million budget for 2017 and the establishment of work plans for the Independent Redress Mechanism and Independent Integrity Units. The Board also discussed the Readiness and Preparatory Support Programme, allocating up to an additional USD 50 million to it.

The document argues that green securitisation—aggregating small-scale low-carbon assets into tradable securities—can unlock significant institutional capital for the energy transition in Europe. It identifies barriers such as a lack of standardised contracts, limited asset volumes per lender, and low credit ratings for new asset classes. To overcome these, the authors propose a public sector agenda including the creation of green asset guidelines, the development of standardised loan contracts, the establishment of financial warehouses, and the provision of credit enhancements and cornerstone investments by development banks and the European Central Bank.

The document identifies three primary barriers to green investment in developing countries: risk gaps (policy, technology, financial, and sovereign), viability gaps (access to finance and high costs), and knowledge gaps. It argues that while sufficient global capital exists, public policy and finance must be better targeted to unlock it. The briefing provides case studies on fiscal policy adjustments in Indonesia to promote sustainable land use, the use of public-private partnerships and government guarantees to develop geothermal power in Kenya, and various innovative instruments developed through the Global Innovation Lab for Climate Finance, such as Energy Savings Insurance and FX hedging facilities.

The document analyzes proposed budget cuts in the FY2018 'skinny' budget, highlighting the elimination of bipartisan programs for low-income energy assistance, climate research, and rural transportation. It details specific reductions across the USDA, DOE, EPA, NASA, and the Department of State, arguing that the 'America First' approach prioritizes physical security and fossil fuels over climate resilience and international cooperation.

The European Investment Bank (EIB) is requesting USD 265 million from the Green Climate Fund (GCF)—USD 250 million for an investment vehicle and USD 15 million for a technical assistance facility—to launch GEEREF NeXt. Structured as a fund-of-funds, the programme aims for a total size of USD 750 million, blending GCF public seed capital with USD 500 million in private sector finance. The programme targets the development, construction, and operation of renewable energy (RE) and energy efficiency (EE) projects in emerging markets, expecting to finance over 200 projects and add up to 18 GW of clean energy capacity. By using a two-tier capital structure with a 'first-loss' mechanism for public capital, GEEREF NeXt intends to mitigate risk for private investors and achieve a projected 50x multiplier, potentially mobilising USD 30 billion in total project financing. The programme will be managed by the EIB Group, leveraging the experience of its predecessor, the Global Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fund (GEEREF).

The document evaluates Indonesia's transition from fixed fuel subsidies to market-aligned pricing, specifically for gasoline, diesel, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). It argues that while the 2015 reforms for gasoline and diesel saved approximately USD 15.6 billion, the system remains vulnerable to international price volatility. The brief proposes several price adjustment models—including smoothing, ratcheting, and cap-and-floor systems—to balance the government's need for fiscal sustainability with the necessity of protecting low-income consumers from sudden price spikes. It concludes with recommendations for a transparent, frequently updated pricing formula managed by an independent agency.

The paper examines how subnational governments, with a focus on Washington State, can effectively use carbon tax revenues for greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. It argues against a narrow focus on the lowest-cost reductions, which often leads to pitfalls such as overpayment, lack of additionality, and long ramp-up periods. Instead, it recommends a strategic approach that targets market failures, promotes social equity, and leverages existing state programs to ensure rapid and effective deployment of funds.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) developed the Clean Energy Momentum State Ranking to evaluate how US states are driving the transition to clean energy. The ranking uses 12 metrics across three categories: technical progress (renewable energy generation, energy savings, and electric vehicle sales), direct effects (job creation and pollution reduction), and future-oriented policies (renewable energy, energy efficiency, and carbon reduction). California is identified as the overall leader, while Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Hawaii also rank in the top five. The analysis concludes that state-level leadership is critical for national momentum, particularly in creating jobs and improving public health, and recommends that states facilitate business involvement and improve energy equity for low-income communities.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) created the Clean Energy Momentum State Ranking to evaluate how US states are advancing renewable energy, energy efficiency, and vehicle electrification. California, Vermont, and Massachusetts are identified as top overall leaders. The report emphasizes that state-level policy is a critical driver of progress, particularly in the absence of consistent federal leadership, and that clean energy momentum creates jobs and improves public health by reducing power plant emissions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists ranked U.S. states on their clean energy momentum using 12 metrics divided into technical progress, direct effects, and policy environments. California ranked first overall, followed by Vermont and Massachusetts. The analysis found that 13 percent of U.S. electricity was generated from renewable energy in 2015, and 36 percent of generating capacity being built between 2016 and 2019 is expected to be renewable. Significant reductions in power plant emissions were noted between 2011 and 2015, with sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide declining by 47, 24, and 11 percent, respectively.