Search Climate Insights Directory

Institutional investors manage approximately $71 trillion in OECD assets, but their ability to fund renewable energy is constrained by liquidity needs, fund size, and policy barriers. While they could potentially cover all corporate equity and debt needs for renewables, their capacity for direct project investment is limited to roughly 24% of equity and 49% of debt requirements. The report suggests five steps to unlock this potential: fixing policy barriers, improving investor practices, modifying regulatory constraints, developing better pooled investment vehicles, and encouraging corporate investors.

The briefing examines the limitations of current U.S. federal tax incentives for renewable energy, which often require complex tax-equity arrangements. It proposes expanding the use of Master Limited Partnerships (MLPs) via the MLP Parity Act, seeking IRS clarification on Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), and utilizing the JOBS Act of 2012 to enable crowdfunding for small-scale projects to lower the cost of capital.

The document identifies five key realms for renewable energy policy: direct purchase mandates, improving the business case through financial incentives, removing non-price barriers, supporting research and development, and addressing grid intermittency. It recommends that Japan maintain its generous feed-in tariffs, expand demand response, and unbundle transmission from generation to increase competition. The report provides detailed international case studies from the US, Germany, and other nations to illustrate effective mechanisms such as Green Banks, loan guarantees, and carbon taxes.

The document describes the technical operation of battery electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), noting that a range of 60 to 120 miles can satisfy the vast majority of daily travel needs. It details the 2012 U.S. market, highlighting the Chevrolet Volt and Nissan LEAF as dominant models and comparing specifications for several other vehicles. The text analyzes the economic impact of battery costs, the necessity of charging infrastructure, and the role of federal and state tax credits in making PEVs commercially viable.

The document distinguishes between all-electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), noting that EVs offer lower maintenance and no tailpipe emissions. It highlights that while the U.S. market is dominated by the Chevrolet Volt and Nissan Leaf, new models like the Tesla Model S provide significantly higher ranges. The text identifies battery costs as the primary expense for PEVs, with projections suggesting prices could drop from $690 per kWh in 2012 to $160 per kWh by 2025. It also details the disparity between the 8,000 public charging stations and 150,000 gasoline stations in the U.S., and outlines federal tax credits up to $7,500 and various state-level incentives in California, Washington, and Colorado.

The report analyzes six case studies—onshore wind in the U.S. and Spain, solar PV in the U.S. and Italy, a solar power tower in the U.S., and offshore wind in Denmark—to determine how policy impacts the cost of finance. It identifies seven policy impact pathways, finding that the duration of revenue support and revenue certainty are the most critical factors in reducing financing costs. The analysis shows that while most projects' costs and returns align with benchmarks, the Italian PV case experienced inflated costs and returns due to a rush to qualify for a Feed-in-Premium. The report concludes that policies reducing risk and providing revenue certainty are essential for attracting institutional investors and scaling innovative technologies.

The report analyzes the effectiveness of tax credits and accelerated depreciation in promoting thermal retrofits, noting that while such schemes see high utilization, they often fail to trigger comprehensive deep retrofits. In contrast, Germany's KfW program achieves a higher rate of comprehensive retrofits by offering significantly higher support for deep measures and requiring certified expert oversight. The authors suggest that simple application processes and policy certainty are critical for investor confidence, particularly for high-cost comprehensive projects.

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that current U.S. biofuels tax credits, particularly the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC), are ineffective because they primarily benefit oil companies and fail to stimulate additional production beyond the requirements of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). The document proposes a Biofuels Performance Tax Credit of $10 per million Btu, which would reward producers based on their ability to reduce global warming emissions and replace oil. This proposed shift could save $5 billion annually starting in 2011 and reduce global warming emissions by up to 50 million metric tons per year by 2022.

Friends of the Earth criticizes the US Congress for attempting to retroactively reauthorize tax credits for fossil fuels and bioenergy that expired in 2009, asserting that such subsidies incur high economic and environmental costs and contradict President Obama's goals.

The document compares different policy instruments for increasing energy efficiency in appliances across several EU member states, finding that while subsidies often lead to greater CO2 reductions, energy taxes generally provide higher welfare gains and lower administrative costs. The effectiveness of these policies varies significantly by product type and country, with tax credits for boilers proving highly cost-effective in Italy and Denmark, and the ban of inefficient washing machines being preferable to manufacturer tax credits in Italy and Poland, despite high overall welfare costs.

The report argues that hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) can bridge the gap between current conventional vehicle technology and the long-term adoption of hydrogen fuel cells. It categorizes hybrids into mild, full, and plug-in types based on technological steps like regenerative braking and electric-only drive. Modeling suggests a passenger fleet using advanced full hybrids could reach an average of 60 mpg, significantly reducing oil consumption and greenhouse gas emissions while remaining cost-effective for consumers over the vehicle's lifetime.

The policy brief recommends that Europe move beyond a heavy reliance on renewable energy and electrification by supporting a broader suite of technologies, including nuclear energy and carbon capture and storage. It analyses the U.S. policy framework—specifically the Energy Act of 2020, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)—as a model for bridging the gap between R&D and large-scale commercial 'take-off'. Key recommendations for the EU include streamlining regulations, providing 'self-activating' incentives, and proactively planning shared infrastructure for CO2 and hydrogen to reduce investor risk and accelerate deployment.

The document outlines a strategic approach for U.S. states to leverage federal funding for industrial decarbonization, organized around four technical pillars: energy efficiency, industrial electrification, carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS), and low-carbon fuels/feedstocks. It provides a three-phase implementation roadmap for states to establish priorities, collaborate with stakeholders, and secure matching funds. Additionally, it includes a comprehensive appendix of specific grants and tax credits from the DOE, EPA, and Treasury, detailing eligibility, funding amounts, and strategic 'next steps' for state-level coordination.

The document outlines the eligibility criteria for federal electric vehicle (EV) tax credits. For new EVs, the full $7,500 credit requires the vehicle to be assembled in North America, meet MSRP caps ($55,000 for sedans; $80,000 for SUVs, vans, or pickups), and satisfy buyer income limits ($150,000 individual; $225,000 head of household; $300,000 joint). New EV eligibility also depends on escalating annual requirements for North American battery component production (50% in 2023, rising to 100% by 2029+) and critical mineral sourcing (40% in 2023, rising to 80% by 2027+). Vehicles with components or minerals from a 'foreign entity of concern' become ineligible starting in 2024 and 2025, respectively. For used EVs, a credit of 30% up to $4,000 is available if the sale price is at or below $25,000 and the buyer's adjusted gross income is at or below $75,000 (individual), $112,000 (head of household), or $150,000 (joint).

The report outlines a framework for energy technology innovation divided into research, engineering, and commercialization. It advocates for the use of innovation hubs, peer review, and 'stage gating' in research; industry-led agendas and shared government testing platforms in engineering; and long-term, liquid market signals and reverse auctions in commercialization to ensure technologies reach market competitiveness efficiently.

The document describes a methodology for downscaling national Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding and co-benefits to the US state level. For tax credits, RMI uses 'Climate-Aligned Targets' based on the Net Zero America study and RMI State Scorecards to estimate potential investment in electric vehicles, renewable energy, heat pumps, and carbon sequestration. For non-tax credit funding (rebates, grants, loans), the analysis downscales Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates using state-specific metrics such as methane emissions, fuel consumption, or population. Public health and jobs benefits are downscaled from Energy Innovation's national modeling based on state population relative to the United States.

The document provides the technical and financial basis for LCOE ranges for electricity generation technologies. It specifies that all technologies are assumed to be online in 2015, with costs expressed in real 2010 dollars over a 20-year recovery period. The analysis incorporates overnight capital costs, fixed charge rates, O&M costs, and fuel price assumptions, while accounting for federal tax credits, loan guarantees for nuclear power, and future carbon prices.

The document serves as a guide for school districts and fleet operators to calculate the total cost of ownership (TCO) for electric school buses (ESBs) versus diesel buses. It addresses the lack of consistent, centralized public data by providing recommended default specifications for parameters including purchase costs, maintenance, fuel economies, and charger installation. The guide also notes the upcoming expiration of the 45W and 30C tax credits due to a July 2025 budget reconciliation bill.

The document outlines a framework for matching policy instruments to the innovation stage of renewable energy technologies. It argues that grants are best for R&D and demonstration to manage high uncertainty, while loan guarantees suit commercialization and early deployment to share technical risk. Tax credits and feed-in tariffs are recommended for later innovation stages to offset upfront costs, and Renewable Electricity Standards (RES) are most effective for mature technologies in early deployment. The brief also emphasizes that a favorable regulatory environment is essential to prevent interconnection and pricing hurdles from undermining these incentives.

The document argues that electric school buses (ESBs) improve air quality and reduce operating costs compared to diesel buses, which contribute to respiratory illnesses and school absenteeism. It highlights the Clean School Bus Program (CSBP) as the primary driver of deployment, having announced nearly $3 billion for 966 awards as of June 2024. To sustain progress, the author recommends that the EPA disburse all awarded funds, Congress preserve specific tax credits, and state governments provide complementary funding, infrastructure support, and workforce training.