Search Climate Insights Directory

The report examines 'M&V 2.0', which combines automated analytics with high-granularity data (such as hourly interval data) to provide near-real-time energy savings estimates. While traditional M&V often relies on delayed reporting and manual analysis, M&V 2.0 offers the potential for faster feedback to program administrators, utilities, and facility owners. However, the authors note significant limitations, including a current focus on existing-conditions baselines rather than standard-practice code baselines, and the difficulty of isolating individual measure-level savings from whole-building meter data. The document outlines the current landscape of proprietary tools, primarily focused on the commercial sector, and discusses ongoing standardization efforts such as the Uniform Methods Project and CalTRACK. To realize the full promise of M&V 2.0, the report recommends conducting more public pilots, establishing collective acceptance criteria for accuracy, and improving automated data access and interoperability.

The analysis finds that high utility demand charges are a primary barrier to the profitability of public DCFC operators, sometimes accounting for over 90% of electricity costs. By modeling current usage data from 230 California stations across four future EV growth scenarios, the report demonstrates that proposed EV-specific tariffs from Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E)—which reduce or eliminate demand charges—would significantly lower costs and enable a more sustainable business model. The authors argue for a shift toward time-varying volumetric rates and the socialization of some infrastructure costs to meet California's transportation electrification goals.

The document analyzes the U.S. home energy financing landscape, distinguishing between traditional lenders (e.g., FHA, Fannie Mae) and nontraditional options (e.g., PACE, on-bill financing). It argues that consumer choice is driven more by the timing of improvements and ease of origination than by interest rates or terms. Key barriers include manual underwriting for traditional products and a lack of standardization and securitization for nontraditional products. The brief recommends automating underwriting for traditional lenders and creating standardized, poolable programs for nontraditional financing to enable scaling.

The report finds that despite the promotion of circular economy goals, the vast majority of carpets in Germany are incinerated and 60% in Europe are landfilled. It highlights a significant discrepancy between the environmental claims of industry leaders Interface and Desso and their actual reclamation rates, which are approximately 1.5% and 3% respectively. The document argues that structural issues, including poor product design, lack of separate collection systems, and an overcapacity of waste incinerators in Germany, hinder the transition to a closed-loop system. It recommends the introduction of product stewardship (Extended Producer Responsibility), an incineration tax, and mandatory bulky waste regulations to incentivise recycling over burning.

The report argues that the European carpet industry is far from achieving a circular economy, with the vast majority of carpets in Germany being incinerated and 60% in Europe being landfilled. Despite the public sustainability branding of market leaders Desso and Interface, the study finds that these companies recover only 1.5% to 3% of the carpets they place on the market. The document identifies structural barriers, including poor eco-design, a lack of comprehensive collection systems, and an overcapacity of waste incineration plants in Germany, which creates financial incentives to burn recyclable materials. It recommends the introduction of extended producer responsibility, a waste incineration tax, and mandatory recycling quotas to shift the industry toward genuine material recovery.

The document outlines a structured approach to grid modernization, emphasizing integrated distribution planning and the use of outcome-oriented metrics for affordability, resilience, and environmental performance. It suggests tying utility revenue to these performance targets through conditional rates of return or budget caps with shared savings to align utility incentives with public benefits.

The report identifies a significant investment opportunity in U.S. community-scale solar (CSS), estimated by NREL to be between $8.2 and $16.3 billion by 2020. It argues that CSS, typically sized between 0.5 and 5 MW, offers a cost-effective middle ground between residential and utility-scale solar. To unlock this potential, the document suggests adapting existing project finance and securitization models, utilizing innovative tools like New Markets Tax Credits, and implementing risk mitigants such as anchor tenants and subscription cushions to address customer attrition and regulatory uncertainty.

The report analyzes the climate impact of electric vehicles (EVs) based on the electricity sources used for charging across different U.S. regions. It finds that while EVs generally produce fewer emissions than gasoline cars, their full potential depends on decarbonizing the power grid by shifting from coal and natural gas to renewable energy. The document also highlights the inherent efficiency of electric drive and the synergistic potential between EVs and renewable energy integration.

The report examines the lifecycle emissions of major transportation fuels, finding that while electricity and biofuels are becoming cleaner, oil is becoming more polluting due to the shift toward unconventional sources like tar sands and fracking. It advocates for the 'Half the Oil' plan to reduce U.S. oil use by 50% by 2035 and calls for greater corporate accountability, transparency in emissions reporting, and a shift toward renewable electricity and non-food biofuels.

The report argues that while vehicle tailpipe emissions are decreasing due to efficiency gains, the overall climate impact of gasoline is rising because the oil industry is shifting toward more energy-intensive and polluting extraction and refining methods. It highlights the high emissions from depleted wells, tight oil (fracking), and tar sands, and calls for increased transparency, the elimination of routine flaring, and a transition to cleaner fuels to reduce the projected 100 billion barrels of oil consumption between 2015 and 2035.

The document reports significant job growth in the U.S. clean energy sector as of early 2016. It highlights that solar and wind industries are expanding rapidly, with solar jobs growing 17 times faster than the overall economy and wind-turbine technicians projected as the fastest-growing occupation. Energy efficiency employs the largest volume of workers at 2.2 million. Geographically, Texas leads in wind jobs, while California leads in solar and energy efficiency jobs.

The document outlines eight key areas for electricity innovation in 2017, focusing heavily on the integration, valuation, and management of distributed energy resources (DERs). It highlights the shift toward technology-agnostic DER valuation, the potential for electric vehicles to serve as grid assets, and the need for alternative capital planning to displace traditional infrastructure. The text also addresses the necessity of evolving utility business models, establishing distribution system operators (DSOs), improving customer engagement, and expanding DER access to low- and moderate-income customers.

The City of Menlo Park is implementing a zero carbon framework by 2025 through an updated General Plan and zoning requirements. Key measures include requiring 100 percent renewable energy for all energy uses (including natural gas) in new developments, mandating LEED certifications, and implementing transportation demand management to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The city is also addressing sea level rise by specifying minimum elevations for new buildings and promoting affordable housing to mitigate displacement in the Belle Haven community.

The document advocates for a transition from flat electricity rates to time-varying pricing to better align consumer demand with the availability of renewable energy. It details three primary rate structures—Time-of-Use, Critical Peak Pricing, and Real-Time Pricing—and explains how households can respond through discretionary shifts, interruptible loads, and energy storage. Using a pilot program from the Sacramento Municipal Utility District as a case study, the brief demonstrates that default enrollment in time-varying rates is more cost-effective and achieves higher aggregate savings than voluntary opt-in programs. The authors emphasize the need for transparent customer education, 'shadow billing,' and protections for low-income and vulnerable populations to ensure an equitable transition.

The paper analyzes four prominent studies of the Clean Power Plan (CPP)—conducted by the EPA, NERA Economic Consulting, Synapse Energy Economics, and M.J. Bradley & Associates—to explain why they produce conflicting results regarding electricity bills. By comparing these studies against a range of independent expert forecasts and empirical data, the authors find a strong correlation between the optimism or pessimism of a study's underlying assumptions and its final economic conclusions. Specifically, studies assuming higher costs for solar and wind power and less interstate cooperation tend to project higher compliance costs, while those assuming rapid technological progress and high energy efficiency savings project lower costs or even decreases in electricity bills.

The US coal industry has faced a sharp decline driven by the shale gas revolution, increasing competitiveness of renewables, and federal environmental regulations. This transition has led to significant job losses and bankruptcies among major coal producers, particularly impacting regions like Appalachia and the Powder River Basin. To mitigate these effects, the Obama administration introduced the Power Plus Plan to fund economic diversification and worker retraining. However, low-income households still face high electricity costs, and bankrupt companies have shifted reclamation and pension liabilities to state budgets.

The document argues that strengthening local food systems increases resilience to climate-driven supply shocks. It recommends that cities protect agricultural land through zoning and greenbelts, embrace soil-free technologies like vertical farming, and promote redundancy through municipal composting and diversified water sources. It also suggests supporting the 'cottage food industry' and community food centres to enhance local resourcefulness and food security.

The document lists various training initiatives in California aimed at supporting the transition to electric buses and trucks. It details government programs like the California Energy Commission's ARFVTP, community college initiatives such as the Alternative Transportation and Renewable Energy Program, and nonprofit efforts like the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Training Program, focusing on workforce development, technical certification, and job placement in the clean energy sector.

The legal marijuana industry in the US creates significant electricity demand due to high-intensity lighting and climate control, with Colorado's industry consuming 300 GWh in 2015. To mitigate the impact on carbon goals and grid stability, the document recommends that utilities support LED adoption through rebates and on-bill financing to overcome capital limitations. It further suggests using time-varying rates to shift lighting schedules to periods of low net load—such as midday in California for solar or nighttime in Colorado for wind—to avoid peak demand and reduce reliance on fossil fuel generation.

RMI proposes that a nearly 100 percent renewable energy system is achievable by the mid-2050s by applying market adoption 'S-curves' seen in previous industrial revolutions to clean energy technologies. The briefing emphasizes that the transition is driven by declining costs, electrification of end-uses, and decentralized adoption rather than solely by government mandates. To meet the 1.5°C target, the document asserts that the energy sector must be paired with high-impact measures in the agricultural, forestry, and land-use (AFOLU) sectors to create net carbon sinks by mid-century.