Search Climate Insights Directory

The document details employment figures for the U.S. green economy, noting that the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated 3.4 million green jobs in late 2011. It provides a granular breakdown of jobs in energy efficiency, which totaled 823,105 direct jobs according to a Brookings-Battelle study, and renewable energy, where total estimates range from 903,536 to 1,055,536 jobs across various technologies including biofuels, hydropower, solar, and wind.

The FY 2014 budget proposal emphasizes investments in clean energy and energy efficiency, proposing a 30 percent increase in clean energy technology funding across all agencies to approximately $7.9 billion. Key initiatives include a $2 billion Energy Security Trust to reduce oil dependence, a $200 million 'Race to the Top' program for grid modernization and energy efficiency, and significant funding increases for the DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). The budget also proposes $2 billion for a satellite system to improve climate modeling and calls for the elimination of $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies.

The report identifies systemic failures within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), including the distraction of nuclear weapons and cleanup missions, a fragmented 'stovepipe' organizational structure, and a lack of objective program evaluation. It recommends consolidating energy and science programs under a single Under Secretary, shifting the focus of applied R&D from energy sources to end-uses, and restoring the Government Owned, Contractor Operated (GOCO) model for national laboratories. The authors advocate for structured public-private consortia to drive pre-commercial research and suggest that large-scale 'first-of-a-kind' commercial demonstrations be led by the private sector rather than the DOE. Additionally, the report proposes moving nuclear weapons and nonproliferation missions to the Department of Defense and environmental cleanup to the Army Corps of Engineers or the EPA to allow DOE leadership to focus exclusively on energy innovation.

The report examines how the DoD's unique capacity for end-to-end research, development, and procurement can be leveraged for energy innovation. It analyzes three case studies—gas turbines, alternative fuels, and soldier-portable power—and compares the innovation models of DARPA and ARPA-E. While the DoD is a powerful engine for technology, the report notes that its contributions to climate goals depend on the alignment of energy needs with the military's core security mission. It highlights the 'Installation Energy Test Bed' as a successful model for overcoming the 'Valley of Death' in technology commercialization.

The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) operates a microgrid that manages 42 megawatts of generating capacity, including solar photovoltaics, a cogeneration plant, and a landfill-gas fuel cell. This system allows the campus to optimize energy costs and 'island' from the main grid during emergencies, such as the September 2011 blackout affecting Southern California, Arizona, and Mexico.

The document outlines the mechanisms of the Federal Production Tax Credit (PTC) and Investment Tax Credit (ITC), including eligibility requirements and expiration dates. It also details the Treasury cash grant, the Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit (MTC), and depreciation rules like MACRS.

The policy brief advocates for a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) as a technology-neutral mechanism to lower the life cycle emissions of transportation fuels. It emphasizes the necessity of 'well-to-wheels' accounting, including indirect land-use changes, to ensure genuine emission reductions. The LCFS is presented as a way to incentivize supply chain improvements, discourage high-carbon fuels like coal-to-liquids, and spur market-driven innovation in low-carbon technologies.

The document outlines various financial mechanisms to transition the U.S. bus fleet away from diesel. It details federal programs managed by the DOT, DOE, and EPA, as well as state-specific initiatives in Texas, California, and New York, emphasizing that combining different grants can significantly reduce the incremental cost of advanced technologies like hybrid-electric buses.

The 2006 School Bus Pollution Report Card by the Union of Concerned Scientists finds that U.S. school buses are among the oldest vehicles on the road, with an average age of nine years, and emit nearly twice as much soot per mile as tractor-trailer trucks. The report grades states on tailpipe soot emissions, smog-forming pollution, and the success of their cleanup programs. While some states like California and Washington have made significant strides in reducing soot through retrofits and cleaner fuels, national soot pollution from school buses has only decreased by more than two percent. The document highlights the vulnerability of children to diesel exhaust, which is linked to asthma and lung growth deficits, and argues that substantial federal and state investment is needed for bus replacement and the installation of particulate traps.

The report evaluates U.S. school bus emissions, finding that older diesel buses release significantly more soot than modern alternatives, posing health risks to children. It grades states on soot emissions, cleanup programs, and smog-forming pollution, noting wide performance gaps. The authors recommend a strategy of 'the five Rs'—retrofitting, refueling, replacement, repair, and reduced idling—and call for strengthened federal standards and increased funding to modernize fleets.

The document highlights several green building projects that achieved significant energy savings and financial gains. Examples include the Sydney 2000 Olympic Village with its large-scale integrated photovoltaics, Village Homes in California which reduced household bills by one-half to one-third, and the Condé-Nast Building in New York, the first large-scale speculative green office building in the US. These projects demonstrate that sustainable design—such as passive heating/cooling, ground-source heat pumps, and efficient land use—can lead to higher property values, lower operating costs, and increased market demand.

The paper examines the potential of end-use energy efficiency to displace primary energy supplies and reduce global carbon emissions. It argues that traditional economic models underestimate this potential by ignoring market failures and the benefits of whole-system design. The author demonstrates that integrating efficiency across an entire system—such as a building or a vehicle—can lead to 'expanding returns' where massive energy savings actually reduce total capital costs. The text advocates for a shift from price-centric policies to 'barrier-busting' and competitive markets for 'negawatts' (saved watts) to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy systems.

The document argues that the technical and economic barriers to a hydrogen economy have been largely resolved. It proposes a decentralized transition strategy starting with fuel cells in buildings and efficient vehicles, utilizing existing natural gas infrastructure as a near-term bridge to renewable sources. The author contends that hydrogen fuel cells are significantly more efficient than internal combustion engines, making hydrogen cost-competitive per mile driven despite higher energy costs per unit. The paper dismisses safety concerns, infrastructure costs, and environmental risks as myths, asserting that a well-designed transition would reduce oil dependence and carbon emissions without requiring a massive federal 'crash program'.

The paper discusses engineering strategies to mitigate climate change, focusing on energy production shifts, technical efficiency, and social changes, while analyzing the ethical risks of nuclear power and carbon capture.

The report argues that while fuel cells have high initial capital costs, they can be cost-effective by capturing 'distributed benefits' such as deferring utility distribution investments, providing premium reliability for the digital economy, and meeting strict urban emission standards. It proposes a commercialization path starting with grid-connected systems in commercial buildings and semiconductor fabs, eventually integrating with fuel-cell vehicles through vehicle-to-grid (V2G) systems.

Amory B. Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute argues that the APS Hydrogen Report incorrectly claims a need for new storage materials and underestimates the competitiveness of reformed hydrogen because it assumes the use of heavy, inefficient vehicles. Lovins asserts that ultralight, high-efficiency vehicle designs make current compressed-gas storage and natural-gas-reformed hydrogen economically viable. He further contends that electrolytic hydrogen is too expensive to justify nuclear power subsidies and criticizes the APS panel for relying on a narrow range of outdated governmental sources rather than current technical evidence.

The report argues that California can significantly reduce its global warming impact by mandating the adoption of existing and near-term vehicle technologies. Modeling shows that currently available improvements in engines, transmissions, and air conditioning could reduce fleet average heat-trapping emissions by 20%, while advanced technologies available within five years could achieve a 40% reduction. These improvements are presented as cost-effective, with fuel savings offsetting initial costs within a few years, and would provide a model for other U.S. states and Canada.

Amory B. Lovins challenges the claim that a U.S. hydrogen economy requires a fourfold expansion of nuclear power. He argues that fuel cells will accelerate the decline of nuclear power by providing cheaper energy services. Lovins asserts that the hydrogen needs for the U.S. highway vehicle fleet could be met by wind turbines in North and South Dakota, and that an orderly transition to hydrogen would require less capital, land, and fossil fuels than a business-as-usual oil-based scenario. He further contends that wind power is more cost-competitive than new nuclear plants and that distributed energy resources offer greater economic value than centralized power stations.

The report analyzes the drivers of U.S. energy insecurity, highlighting the high dependence on oil imports from unstable regions and the vulnerability of domestic infrastructure like the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System. It argues that energy productivity gains since 1975 have been the nation's largest energy 'source' and that further efficiency improvements in light vehicles could displace net imports from the Persian Gulf.

The document outlines various biomass sources, including residues and perennial energy crops like switchgrass, and describes conversion technologies ranging from direct combustion to fuel cells. It argues that expanding biomass production can revitalize rural economies and protect land quality while potentially providing a significant share of U.S. electricity and motor fuel.