Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines a framework for corporate leadership in the transition to 100% renewable electricity, drawing on best practices from RE100 members. It provides case studies and specific recommendations from the RE100 Technical Advisory Group to help corporate buyers maximize their impact on market shifts, while clarifying that it does not define the eligibility criteria for joining the RE100 initiative.

The report examines the role of economic instruments in leveraging private investment for clean energy in India, Mexico, and Indonesia. It analyzes the impact of India's GST reform, Mexico's Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) market, and Indonesia's fossil fuel subsidy reforms, concluding that economic policies must be aligned with international climate commitments to effectively signal and incentivize private sector investment.

The research note analyzes a U.S. Department of Energy proposal to subsidize uneconomic power plants to maintain grid reliability. It estimates that keeping six FirstEnergy coal and nuclear plants online for two years would cost approximately $2 billion. The author contends that these funds would be better spent on locally-led economic diversification and workforce development, noting that grid operators and reliability bodies do not believe such interventions are necessary for stability. The document suggests that redirecting these funds could provide over $300 million per affected community to support a just transition.

The We Mean Business Coalition advocates for the implementation of the U.S. Clean Power Plan, stating it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 and save consumers US$155 billion between 2020 and 2030. The author contends that the plan is supported by the private sector because it removes barriers to scaling clean energy and reduces business risk, countering claims that the policy would harm the economy.

The Paris Agreement is projected to significantly impact the global economy and private sector as the international community aims for net zero emissions by the second half of the century. The report examines how the agreement and NDCs influence renewable energy markets, carbon pricing, and climate risk management, with a specific focus on clean energy investments, energy efficiency, and the competitiveness of renewables.

A coalition of businesses and environmental organizations calls on the United States to implement the Clean Power Plan and invest in a low-carbon economy to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.

The World Resources Institute (WRI) endorses President Obama's commitment to enact new emissions standards for existing power plants as part of the Climate Action Plan. WRI argues that such standards can drive innovation and economic opportunity, noting that the average U.S. coal plant is nearly 40 years old. The statement emphasizes that U.S. domestic leadership is essential to meeting its international commitment to reduce emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 and to securing a universal climate agreement in Paris in 2015.

The Union of Concerned Scientists evaluated the ten largest publicly owned utilities (POUs) in California based on their 2010 compliance with the state's Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS). While these utilities collectively increased their RPS-eligible investments from 4.1% of retail sales in 2003 to 18.8% in 2010, the report finds significant disparity in how this was achieved. Some utilities, such as Silicon Valley Power and Modesto Irrigation District, are categorized as "running ahead," while others, like Roseville Electric and Imperial Irrigation District, are labeled as having a "false start" due to a reliance on short-term contracts that do not promote new clean energy development. The report emphasizes that long-term contracts and ownership of facilities are essential to meet the increased 33% RPS requirement for 2020 and to reduce the state's continued heavy reliance on fossil fuels.

The document argues for the implementation of strict EPA standards on coal-fired power plant emissions, specifically targeting mercury, benzene, and arsenic. It highlights the public health risks of mercury, the ability of many plants to already adopt pollution controls, and the potential for clean energy sources like wind and solar to replace polluting plants.

The Executive Director of the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) highlights a series of energy-related disasters and political challenges, including the nuclear crisis in Japan and attempts to limit the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases. The document emphasizes the need for science-based, non-partisan analysis to transition to a clean energy economy and mentions the organization's role in organizing the 14th Annual Technology Expo & Policy Forum.

The document reviews the G-20's 2009 commitment to phase out inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies, which were identified as drivers of wasteful consumption and barriers to clean energy investment and climate action. It evaluates progress made up to the June 2010 Toronto Summit and provides a roadmap with six recommended actions for the upcoming Seoul Summit in November 2010.

The document examines the barriers to clean energy investment in South Africa, highlighting the dominant role of the state-owned utility Eskom and a heavy reliance on coal. It analyzes the national policy framework, including the 2003 White Paper on Renewable Energy and the 2008 National Energy Act, while evaluating incentives such as the Renewable Energy Feed-in Tariff (REFIT) and Tradable Renewable Energy Certificates (TRECs). The report concludes that while macroeconomic stability is favorable, institutional barriers and a lack of political will are the primary hurdles to scaling renewable energy.

A coalition of environmental organizations urges the U.S. Senate to reject expanded offshore oil and gas drilling, citing the Deepwater Horizon disaster as evidence of the inherent risks to marine ecosystems and coastal economies. The group argues that offshore reserves are insufficient to achieve energy independence and instead calls for a transition to carbon-free energy technologies and a national renewable electricity standard.

The author contends that 'grandfathering' existing coal-fired power plants in climate legislation would repeat past mistakes by incentivizing the continued operation of polluting facilities. The text argues that the Clean Air Act's regulatory powers are essential and complementary to a cap-and-trade system to ensure rapid emissions reductions and the growth of a clean energy economy.

The document outlines how scientists use climate models, atmospheric records, and carbon isotope signatures to prove that human-induced greenhouse gas emissions are the primary driver of global warming since the mid-20th century. It highlights the consensus among the scientific community and major bodies like the IPCC, while noting that attribution science can now link specific extreme weather events to climate change.

Friends of the Earth criticizes H.R. 2454, stating it fails to mandate actual U.S. emissions reductions until 2030 and weakens the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act. The organization contends the bill prioritizes polluting industries and Wall Street through free pollution permits and carbon market loopholes, thereby undermining U.S. global leadership and job creation in green industries.

Friends of the Earth refuses to support the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, stating that the bill fails to implement the necessary national and international actions to mitigate climate change and promote a clean energy economy, attributing these failures to the influence of oil and coal interests in Congress.

The document argues that public funding for clean energy in developing countries is insufficient and that the private sector must be the primary driver of investment. It identifies two main categories of obstacles: international investment agreements (IIAs), which may expose governments to arbitration over climate regulations, and domestic policy barriers, such as lack of clear energy signals and monopoly structures. The author suggests that technology transfer is essentially an investment problem and recommends diagnostic national studies, similar to the WTO's Integrated Framework, to identify and remove these barriers.

The report identifies a critical gap between the investment needed for clean energy in developing countries and current funding levels, arguing that the private sector must be the primary driver. It details domestic barriers such as political instability, lack of clear energy policies, and financial system deficiencies, while proposing incentives like feed-in tariffs and microfinance. Additionally, it examines how International Investment Agreements (IIAs), including the Energy Charter Treaty and the ECOWAS Energy Protocol, can either facilitate or restrict a state's regulatory space to implement climate-related policies due to protections against indirect expropriation and requirements for fair and equitable treatment.

The report argues that while public funds like the $10 billion Clean Technology Fund are necessary, they are insufficient compared to the $22 trillion needed for energy investment by 2030. It identifies domestic policy barriers—such as lack of clear energy signals, monopoly structures, and subsidies for conventional energy—as primary obstacles that make developing countries unattractive to investors. Internationally, the document notes that the 'spaghetti bowl' of international investment agreements (IIAs) may chill climate regulations through risks of indirect expropriation claims and 'fair and equitable treatment' obligations. It recommends national diagnostic studies to identify specific barriers and suggests that improving domestic investment environments is a critical, yet overlooked, mechanism for facilitating technology transfer.