Search Climate Insights Directory

Between 1997 and 2006, fossil fuel consumption in the Southeast grew by approximately 14 percent, significantly exceeding both the national average growth rate of 5 percent and the regional growth of non-fossil energy sources, which was less than 1 percent.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of employment trends in the clean energy sector, contrasting the job-creation potential of renewables and energy efficiency with traditional fossil fuel industries. It highlights specific national and state-level projections in the U.S., international trends in the EU and Brazil, and sector-specific data for wind, solar, biofuels, and geothermal energy, while also noting the decline of coal mining employment.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analysis indicates that a 15 percent by 2020 national renewable electricity standard would reduce consumer energy costs, increase renewable energy capacity, and lower power plant CO2 emissions in the United States.

The House and Senate both proposed significantly higher funding for DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE/RE) programs for FY 2008 than the Administration's request. The House bill (H.R. 2641) appropriated $1.98 billion, while the Senate bill (S. 1751) appropriated $1.72 billion. Both legislative bodies restored funding for geothermal energy and hydropower, which the Administration had eliminated, and increased budgets for solar, wind, and biomass R&D. Additionally, both the House and Senate increased funding for fossil fuel R&D while appropriating less than the Administration's request for nuclear power.

The document identifies wind power as the most cost-effective near-term option for increasing renewable electricity in New England, noting that the region's onshore wind resources have the technical potential to supply approximately 60 percent of its current electricity use. It frames this within the broader need to transform the energy system to limit global warming, noting that the Northeast United States emits more CO2 than all but six countries globally. While other solutions like energy efficiency and carbon capture are discussed, wind is presented as more viable than solar, bioenergy, or geothermal power in the region due to cost and resource availability. The document states that if all currently proposed wind projects in New England were completed, they would generate over 5,700 gigawatt-hours of CO2-free electricity annually, representing about seven percent of the electricity used in the proposing states.

The report evaluates Hawai`i County's goals across ten areas, including affordable housing, energy self-sufficiency, and environmental stewardship. It argues that the loss of local land control to outside investors is the island's most critical challenge, driving a housing crisis and eroding the social fabric (ohana). RMI recommends implementing land trusts, deed restrictions, and green building standards to ensure permanent affordability. The document emphasizes 'whole-system thinking' to address root causes rather than symptoms, suggesting that the county maximize its local economic multiplier by producing energy and food locally. A significant portion of the report is dedicated to proposing specific indicators to measure progress toward these goals to ensure transparency and durability.

The document argues that the World Bank's energy investment framework is a continuation of 'more of the same', failing to transition from fossil fuels to renewables. It highlights a contradiction where the Bank acts as a major carbon trader while continuing to fund projects that emit massive amounts of greenhouse gases. The report criticizes the Bank's promotion of 'clean coal', nuclear energy, and large dams, asserting these technologies cause significant environmental and social harm. It calls for a redirection of public finance from the North to the South toward decentralized renewable energy and energy efficiency to meet the needs of the world's poor.

The document outlines how U.S. consumers can support renewable energy via green pricing, green marketing, and Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). It contrasts the environmental benefits of renewables—such as wind, solar, and geothermal—against the pollution and health risks associated with coal, oil, nuclear power, and natural gas. It also provides tools for verifying green power claims, including the Green-e certification and the Power Scorecard tool.

The document describes geothermal energy as the third largest renewable energy source, noting that the United States is the world's largest producer with 2,800 MW of connected capacity. It details three power plant technologies—flash steam, dry steam, and binary cycle—alongside direct-use and heat pump applications. Key benefits include base load power availability and significantly lower CO2 emissions compared to coal, though the document notes risks such as land subsidence and induced seismicity.

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 document records a multi-sector call for a U.S. transition to clean energy, arguing that government investment and regulation can simultaneously drive economic growth, reduce oil dependence, and address climate change.

The document examines the intersection of land use and energy efficiency, proposing a framework based on 'how' and 'where' we build to reduce fossil fuel dependence. It advocates for 'energy smart' growth, which combines compact, mixed-use development with green building standards and renewable energy. The author provides recommendations for funders to support this merger through research, integrated planning tools, policy incentives, and innovative financing like location-efficient mortgages.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) graded U.S. states on their commitment to renewable energy, finding that 34 states received failing grades (D or F) and only 16 passed. While 19 states have enacted standards or funds projected to add 15,215 MW of capacity by 2017, the gains are highly concentrated, with California and Texas accounting for nearly 60 percent of forecasted new development. The report argues that current state-level efforts are insufficient compared to the technical potential of wind, solar, bioenergy, geothermal, and landfill gas, and advocates for a national renewable electricity standard to achieve more equitable and cost-effective energy generation.

The report evaluates U.S. state commitments to renewable energy, finding that while technical potential is vast, most states lack binding policies. It grades states based on renewable electricity standards (RES) and funds, noting that a small number of states, led by California and Nevada, drive most projected gains, while 34 states received failing grades. The authors argue for a national renewable electricity standard to ensure equitable and cost-effective growth.

The document argues that reducing environmental impact requires a shift from selling products to providing services, alongside a massive transition to renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies. It outlines 'eco-design' principles and specific energy options—such as combined heat and power, hybrid engines, and various renewables—while encouraging science and engineering graduates to seek employers committed to reducing life-cycle impacts.

The Clean Energy Blueprint proposes a comprehensive set of policies to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy in the US. By 2020, the plan aims to have non-hydro renewables provide 20% of electricity, reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by two-thirds compared to business-as-usual, and save consumers $440 billion. The report argues that these measures would eliminate the need for 975 new power plants and significantly reduce reliance on coal and natural gas.

The Union of Concerned Scientists identifies seven policy tools—Renewables Portfolio Standards, public benefits funding, net metering, fair transmission/distribution rules, fair pollution rules, consumer information, and green customer demand—to transition the US to renewable energy. It argues that deregulation risks favoring fossil fuels unless these mechanisms internalize the public benefits of renewables and remove market barriers.

The report analyzes Ecuador's energy sector, focusing on its heavy reliance on oil and the potential for reducing CO2 emissions. It proposes a mitigation scenario involving increased energy efficiency in households, industry, and transport, alongside a shift toward renewable energy in power generation.

The report analyzes four energy scenarios for the US up to 2030: a Reference case, a Market case, an Environmental case, and a Climate Stabilization case. It finds that shifting toward efficiency and renewables can lead to net economic savings of up to $2.3 trillion and dramatic reductions in CO2 emissions. The authors propose a comprehensive policy framework based on harnessing market forces, establishing efficiency standards, and increasing R&D investment to move the US away from its current reliance on polluting fossil fuels.

The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) calls for a decisive U.S. energy policy to address global warming, urban air pollution, and economic competitiveness. The primary recommendation is to prioritize energy efficiency through tax strategies, such as a carbon dioxide tax and phased-in gasoline taxes, and the removal of fossil fuel subsidies. The report also advocates for stimulating renewable energy sources, halting deforestation, and leading international efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions, including a total phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).