Search Climate Insights Directory

The document warns that TTIP may prioritize trade over public health by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could weaken chemical safety standards. It highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH approach and the US's risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that mutual recognition would effectively erase protections unique to one jurisdiction. The author also cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and the preemption of sub-national laws, while noting that TTIP could negatively influence chemical regulations in non-member countries like the BRIICS nations.

The statement argues that the current U.S. chemical regulation system is inadequate and warns that the TTIP could hinder progress on chemical safety by weakening existing EU and U.S. state standards. It calls for a trade agreement that prioritizes public health over corporate interests, rejects mutual recognition in sensitive sectors, and ensures transparency in negotiations.

Earthjustice evaluates President Obama's 2013 Climate Action Plan (CAP), noting its focus on coal-fired power plants and energy efficiency but criticizing its 'overly soft approach' to methane emissions and the omission of carbon limits for oil refineries, shipping, and aviation.

The paper argues that South Africa's National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 target of 5.4% average annual GDP growth is 'very ambitious' and unlikely to be met under current trends. Using the International Futures (IFs) model, the authors find a 'Base Case' average growth of 3.4% for 2014-2030, significantly lower than the NDP target and regional peers. While the 'Highway' scenario shows that combining aggressive interventions—such as reducing corruption, curbing HIV/AIDS, and increasing foreign direct investment—could push growth above 5%, such a path requires systemic structural change. Conversely, the analysis suggests that targets for education and infrastructure are 'eminently achievable' even with lower economic growth, indicating a potential lack of integration in the NDP's sectoral planning.

The report analyzes the intersection of the U.S. electricity sector, water resources, and climate change, arguing that current power generation is vulnerable to water scarcity and high temperatures. Through modeling of four scenarios—Business as Usual, Renewables-and-Efficiency, CCS-and-Nuclear, and a general Carbon Budget—the authors find that a transition toward renewable energy and energy efficiency can drastically reduce both carbon emissions and water withdrawals and consumption. Conversely, low-carbon options like nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS) remain water-intensive. The report provides a set of "water-smart criteria" for decision-makers to enhance the resilience of the U.S. power grid in a warming world.

The Greens oppose the TTIP due to a lack of transparency, the potential for lowered consumer and environmental standards, and the use of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. They argue that the agreement undermines multilateralism by setting global standards without broader international consultation and call for the inclusion of civil society and parliaments in the negotiation process.

The Green party opposes the TTIP due to its secretive negotiation process and the risk that it will lower standards for consumer protection, health, and the environment. They specifically reject the inclusion of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism and the potential for the agreement to impose global trade standards that undermine the World Trade Organization and the influence of the Global South.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) has endorsed a set of fifteen water and air protection standards developed with shale gas producers in the Marcellus region, to be overseen by the Center for Sustainable Shale Development (CSSD). These standards include a ban on discharging fracking water to surface waters, a 90% water recycling requirement, and zero gas discharge to the air for wells in production. While CATF views these as the toughest standards globally, it maintains that voluntary industry agreements are not a substitute for government regulation and advocates for federal mandates on carbon capture and storage for natural gas power production.

A coalition of environmental organizations argues that proposed LNG exports from the United States could raise domestic energy prices, increase methane emissions through expanded fracking, and harm the middle class, necessitating a new economic study and a full environmental impact statement.

Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica criticizes Ernest J. Moniz's support for nuclear power and fracking, while praising Gina McCarthy's record at the EPA and calling for stronger White House support for climate regulations.

The report assesses worldwide methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, estimating 2010 emissions at 1,554 MMTCO2e. It argues that methane is a critical target for short-term climate mitigation due to its 20-year global warming potential (GWP) being 72 times that of carbon dioxide. The document details over 80 abatement technologies, such as vapor recovery units and infrared leak imaging cameras, while analyzing barriers including government price controls, lack of industry knowledge, and the complexities of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

A survey of Maryland residents in 2013 found that air pollution is viewed as the top personal health risk and that a majority of residents believe climate change is already harming people in the United States. The study highlights a strong public preference for renewable energy sources over fossil fuels and nuclear power due to health concerns. It also reveals that residents with multiple pre-existing medical conditions are more likely to perceive themselves as vulnerable to climate-related health impacts. Additionally, the report notes high public support for government prioritisation of protecting public water supplies and human health from environmental threats.

The author argues that geologic carbon storage and hydraulic fracturing can safely coexist in the U.S., asserting that a Princeton study erroneously ignored the vertical separation (depth) between storage reservoirs and shale gas formations. The text emphasizes that multiple impermeable layers often separate these activities and that regulatory oversight and 3D geologic studies can mitigate risks. Additionally, it notes that U.S. storage capacity is vast, including offshore sites and depleted petroleum formations, meaning shale gas activity will not impede carbon capture and storage development.

The report identifies systemic barriers to evidence-based decision-making regarding hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in the U.S., including industry interference in academic and government research, legal loopholes in federal environmental laws, and a lack of transparency regarding chemical use. It highlights how non-disclosure agreements in legal settlements silence affected citizens and hide scientific data. The document provides a framework for communities to seek reliable information and calls for comprehensive laws requiring baseline and ongoing environmental monitoring and full chemical disclosure.

The brief, filed by a coalition of physicians, scientists, and environmental advocates, contends that the natural gas industry systematically suppresses public health data through federal exemptions, state laws, and confidential legal settlements. It argues that the public interest in understanding the health risks of hydraulic fracturing—such as water contamination and air pollution—outweighs the private interests of gas companies in maintaining secrecy. The authors specifically highlight the Hallowich family's experience with deteriorating health due to nearby gas operations and urge the court to reverse a lower court's decision to seal the case records.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) evaluates the EPA's New Source Performance Standards for the oil and natural gas industry, noting that the rules will reduce VOCs by hundreds of thousands of tons and methane by 1.0 to 1.7 million tons annually. However, CATF criticizes a 2.5-year delay in requiring 'green-completion' for fracked wells and the total exclusion of the natural gas transmission and storage segment, which emits over 2 million tons of methane and 65,000 tons of VOC per year.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) argues that the EPA's final New Source Performance Standards for the oil and gas industry must require 'green completions' to capture methane and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The memo asserts that methane from US oil and gas operations is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide over 100 years and contributes to global warming as much as 16% of all CO2 from US coal-fired power plants. CATF rejects industry claims that green completions are too costly or that flaring is a sufficient alternative, noting that such technologies are already used in states like Colorado and Wyoming.

The document argues that the EPA's proposed air pollution standards for the natural gas sector are essential for protecting public health and the environment, particularly through the implementation of 'green completion' technology to capture methane and smog-forming emissions from fracked wells. The authors contend that these standards are cost-effective, as the sale of recovered gas offsets compliance costs, and that they will not hinder domestic production, citing examples from Colorado and Wyoming. The letter specifically rejects proposed industry loopholes from the American Petroleum Institute (API), such as VOC percentage thresholds and implementation delays, which the authors claim would exempt millions of tons of pollution and undermine the standards' effectiveness.

The briefing examines the impact of the U.S. natural gas boom on renewable energy, noting that while low spot prices hinder utility-scale project financing in the near term, distributed solar PV and falling wind costs will sustain the transition.

The report finds broad American support for developing clean energy and reducing global warming, though support for specific policies like CO2 regulation and renewable energy research has declined since 2008. While there is bipartisan agreement on increasing renewable energy use, significant partisan divides exist regarding the reduction of fossil fuels and the priority level of global warming. Americans perceive large campaign contributors and fossil-fuel companies as having the most influence over elected officials' decisions on climate issues.