Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing analyzes Canada's 2014 emissions trends, highlighting a projected 116 Mt gap between 2020 emissions (727 Mt) and the Copenhagen Accord target (611 Mt). While policies in the electricity and transportation sectors provide mitigation, growth in the oil sands and general economic expansion drive emissions upward. The report notes that the oil and gas sector became Canada's largest emission source in 2012 and that significant reductions are concentrated in Ontario due to its coal phase-out, while Alberta sees the most growth.

Carbon Market Watch argues that previous market-based mechanisms, such as the CDM and EU ETS, failed due to oversupply and poor environmental integrity. To prevent these failures in a post-2020 regime, the organization recommends strict eligibility rules based on national ambition, the exclusion of REDD-plus and agriculture from carbon markets, and the implementation of discounting to ensure net atmospheric benefits. It further calls for a UN-led standard-setting body, a robust institutional safeguard system to protect human rights, and a share of proceeds from all traded units to be allocated to the Adaptation Fund.

The document analyzes the 2014 U.S.-China climate agreement, detailing the specific emissions targets for both nations and their plans to transition away from coal toward renewables and natural gas. It discusses the diplomatic significance of the deal for the 2015 Paris negotiations and the specific pressures it places on Canada to increase its own climate ambitions and regulate its oil and gas sector.

The document outlines how the U.S. economy can benefit from reducing greenhouse gas emissions in electric generation, electricity consumption, passenger vehicles, natural gas, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). It highlights cost savings for consumers and businesses, the decreasing cost of renewable energy and electric vehicle batteries, and the potential for increased industry revenues through methane leak reduction.

The event highlighted how climate change negatively impacts health through food insecurity, physical inactivity, and air pollution, while arguing that focusing on health co-benefits can overcome political inertia. Key recommendations include transitioning to sustainable diets, redesigning cities for active transportation, and divesting the healthcare sector from fossil fuels.

The policy brief analyzes the effectiveness of coal-fired electricity regulations in Canada and the United States. It finds that the U.S. approach, which targets the broader electricity sector and existing plants, will deliver significantly higher national emission reductions by 2020 and 2030 than the Canadian approach, which focuses on new plants and those reaching the end of their useful life. Despite these policies, neither country is projected to meet its Copenhagen Accord target of a 17% reduction in emissions by 2020 relative to 2005 levels.

The 2012 Seattle Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory finds that core emissions (road transportation, building energy, and waste) declined 4% from 1990 to 2012 after accounting for offsets. While absolute core emissions remained relatively flat, per person core emissions decreased by 22% over the same period, despite a 23% increase in population and a 14% increase in jobs. Road transportation remains the largest core emission source at 64%, while building energy and waste account for 33% and 3% respectively. In an expanded view including industry and air/marine travel, total emissions were 6.0 million tons CO2e in 2012, representing a 1% reduction from 1990 levels, falling short of a 7% reduction target.

The World Resources Institute supports the U.S. EPA's proposed emissions standards for new power plants as a key component of the President's Climate Action Plan. While the standards provide flexibility through carbon capture and storage (CCS) and reflect market shifts toward natural gas and renewables, the document emphasizes that addressing the existing power plant fleet is the most critical opportunity for emissions reductions, as electricity generation accounts for one-third of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

The document analyzes President Obama's 2013 climate strategy, which shifts toward EPA sector-regulation for electricity due to congressional inaction on carbon pricing. It compares this approach to Canada's regulations, examines the potential for continental equivalency in emissions trading, and discusses the plan's impact on the Keystone XL Pipeline and international climate negotiations.

The document asserts that the United States can save billions of dollars annually by implementing the National Climate Action Plan, noting that the costs of climate inaction—such as extreme weather damages—are already significant. It highlights four key areas for emissions reductions: power plants, energy efficiency, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and methane, arguing that the resulting public health and economic gains exceed regulatory costs. The text further claims that EPA regulations often cost less than projected and can stimulate industry investment by providing a clear regulatory framework.

The World Resources Institute (WRI) responds to President Obama's State of the Union address by identifying key policy levers to meet U.S. emissions targets. WRI argues that while executive action is necessary, market-based legislation to price carbon would maximize economic benefits. To reach the 2020 target, WRI recommends enacting standards for existing power plants, reducing hydrofluorocarbons, addressing methane leaks from natural gas systems, and improving energy efficiency.

The document identifies short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs)—including black carbon, methane, tropospheric ozone, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)—as gases and particulates with atmospheric lifetimes of less than 20 years that contribute to approximately half of global warming. It argues that while CO2 reduction is vital for long-term stability, SLCP mitigation offers faster results to slow the rate of warming, particularly in sensitive regions like the Arctic and Himalayas. The text details the specific radiative forcing and warming potentials of these pollutants, their primary sources (such as oil and gas production and biomass burning), and the associated co-benefits for food security and public health.

Carbon Market Watch argues that banning HFCs in refrigeration is essential to prevent the lock-in of high-emission infrastructure and to achieve indirect greenhouse gas reductions through improved energy efficiency. The letter asserts that a phase-down schedule alone is insufficient and warns against allowing multinational commercial interests to delay regulatory action that would otherwise benefit smaller European companies producing alternatives.

A coalition of environmental NGOs is calling on the European Commission to implement subsector-specific "placing on the market" (POM) prohibitions for new HFC-based equipment in the shipping sector. The letter argues that current recovery and containment measures are insufficient, noting leakage rates in the current fleet can reach up to 200% annually. The coalition asserts that applying containment and recovery measures could reduce maritime HFC emissions by 40% by 2020 compared to business-as-usual, at a cost of €22/tonne, which is lower than the average cost of other HFC reduction measures.

The document examines the role of non-UNFCCC institutions in addressing climate change, suggesting that while the UNFCCC must remain the central coordinator due to its legitimacy and legal authority, other multilateral and minilateral venues can provide faster action or target specific pollutants. It warns against the risks of 'forum-shopping' and the marginalization of the UNFCCC, recommending formalized coordination and the application of UNFCCC principles, such as 'common but differentiated responsibilities', across all climate-related initiatives.

The document details California's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 under the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32). It outlines a cap-and-trade program scheduled for January 2012, alongside 'early action' measures such as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and landfill methane capture. The briefing also highlights California's leadership in the Western Climate Initiative and the political support for these measures following the defeat of Proposition 23 in November 2010.

The World Resources Institute analysis finds that while existing federal and state tools can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, even the most ambitious 'Go-Getter' scenario falls short of the U.S. Copenhagen pledge to reduce emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. The report models three levels of regulatory ambition—Lackluster, Middle-of-the-Road, and Go-Getter—across key sectors including power plants, transportation, and industry. It concludes that additional legislative action is necessary to meet international climate targets and the long-term goal of 80 to 95 percent reductions by 2050.

The Montreal Protocol successfully phased out the production of ozone-depleting substances (ODSs), but failed to address the global warming potential of existing ODS banks and the rapid growth of hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) substitutes. ODS banks, if not controlled, risk releasing significant greenhouse gases, while HFC emissions are projected to increase substantially by 2050, particularly in developing countries. The document examines policy options such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, producer responsibility programs in other developed nations, and proposals to expand the Montreal Protocol's mandate to include HFCs.

In 2005, total global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions were estimated at 44,153 MtCO2 equivalent, representing a 12.7% increase from 2000. The energy sector, specifically electricity, heat, and transportation, drove much of this growth, with developing countries accounting for the majority of emissions in electricity, heat, and industry. While high global warming potential gases grew by 44% between 2000 and 2005, they remain a small percentage of total emissions. Notably, revised methodologies for calculating land-use change reduced its estimated share of total GHGs from 18.2% to 12.2%, although actual emissions from this sector grew by 4.1% during the period.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) developed the Vanguard blueprint to show that current technologies—such as cylinder deactivation, turbocharging, and continuously variable transmissions—can reduce global warming emissions across all vehicle classes. The report argues that while individual components are already used in many 2008 model year vehicles, automakers are resisting the implementation of full technology packages that would meet the 2016 clean car standard. Financial analysis indicates that for various vehicle types, the increase in purchase price for these upgrades would be offset by lifetime consumer savings, with payback periods ranging from 2.1 to 3.6 years.