Search Climate Insights Directory

The Californians for Toxic-Free Fire Safety coalition applauds Governor Jerry Brown's decision to update California's outdated flammability standards, specifically Technical Bulletin 117 (TB 117). The coalition argues that toxic flame retardants are ineffective at stopping fires, contaminate the environment globally, and are linked to severe health issues including cancer, infertility, and lower IQ. They highlight that Californians, particularly children and pregnant women, exhibit some of the highest levels of these chemicals in their bodies.

The research paper evaluates four types of cost limits—alternative compliance payments, contract price caps, retail rate/revenue impact caps, and renewable energy fund caps—across several U.S. states. It finds that while cost limits can insure against unacceptably high costs, they often create market uncertainty, may act as price floors rather than ceilings, and can conflict with renewable energy targets if not aligned with expected costs. For California, the author recommends avoiding public contract-level benchmarks, ensuring the limit is consistent with expected RPS costs, and implementing a simple, clearly defined mechanism with a predictable review process.

The analysis finds that EVs generally produce lower global warming emissions than average compact gasoline vehicles, though their relative performance against high-efficiency hybrids depends on the regional electricity grid's fuel mix. In 'BEST' regions, EVs outperform 50 mpg hybrids, while in 'GOOD' regions, some hybrids remain a better choice for emissions. Financially, EV owners in 50 major U.S. cities can save between $750 and $1,200 annually in fuel costs when using the lowest-cost electricity plans, with significant additional savings available through time-of-use (TOU) rate plans, particularly in California.

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 Union of Concerned Scientists explains its analysis of 28 S&P 500 companies, finding that half misrepresented climate science in public communications despite expressing general concern about climate change. The document highlights the contradiction between corporate public images and their indirect actions, such as funding anti-climate science members of Congress or trade groups. It argues that current disclosure requirements are insufficient to hold corporations accountable for their influence on national and state-level climate policy, including efforts to undercut wind energy and roll back renewable energy laws.

The report identifies a critical gap between climate science outputs and the operational needs of transportation practitioners. It argues that adaptation requires not only improved climate data—such as updated precipitation atlases and sea-level rise projections—but also a deep understanding of local non-climate factors like infrastructure elevation and soil saturation. The document emphasizes the need for a 'central clearinghouse' of information, better 'Climate-to-English' translation of scientific terms, and the integration of climate risk into existing asset management and budgeting processes. It highlights various pilot projects and tools, including the FHWA Risk Assessment Model and Toronto's Climate Change Risk Assessment Tool, as pathways toward increasing the adaptive capacity of transportation systems.

The report analyzes 28 S&P 500 companies to determine how they engage with climate science and policy. It finds a significant divide between companies that consistently support science-based policy and those that obstruct it. A large number of companies are identified as 'contradictory,' maintaining a public image of environmental concern while funding think tanks, trade groups, and politicians that undermine climate science. The authors argue that a lack of transparency in corporate political spending and risk disclosure allows this interference to persist, and they recommend stricter disclosure requirements for corporations and government contractors.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed 28 S&P 500 companies to determine their impact on climate science and policy discussions. The study found that while some companies are consistent in their support for climate action, others—particularly in the energy sector—actively spread misinformation and obstruct policy. Many companies exhibit contradictory behavior, supporting climate science in public relations while opposing it in government filings or through the funding of anti-science think tanks and trade groups. The report highlights a critical lack of transparency in corporate political spending and business risk disclosures, recommending stricter SEC and congressional requirements to hold corporations accountable.

The document examines California's Low Emissions Vehicle (LEV) and Clean Fuels regulation, specifically the ZEV mandate, using the Technology Innovation System (TIS) framework. It details how the mandate evolved from a strict requirement for pure electric vehicles to a more flexible approach that supported the development of Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV), Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles (PHEV), and Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs).

The Clean Air Task Force supports the EPA's proposed new source performance standards (NSPS) for fossil-fueled power plants, which would limit emissions to 1,000 lbs. of CO2 per megawatt-hour. The author asserts that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology is currently available and cost-effective, enabling new coal plants to meet or exceed these standards. The document highlights existing commercial CCS projects and the potential for the enhanced oil recovery (EOR) industry to create commercial demand for captured anthropogenic CO2, providing a hedge against future emissions if natural gas prices rise.

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that U.S. farm policy disproportionately supports non-perishable commodity crops while hindering 'healthy-food' farms—those growing fruits and vegetables using sustainable or organic practices. Key barriers include planting restrictions in subsidy programs, a lack of accessible whole-farm-revenue insurance, and credit constraints for small-scale or diversified operations. The report recommends eliminating planting restrictions, reforming the Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR) insurance pilot to be more flexible and national in scope, removing arbitrary surcharges for organic farmers, and expanding micro-lending programs to support rural economic development.

The report examines how the growth of distributed energy resources (DERs), particularly rooftop solar PV, disrupts traditional utility business models in California. It argues that existing volumetric rate structures and net energy metering (NEM) create economic misalignments and cost shifts from solar adopters to non-adopters. To resolve this, the authors propose three building blocks: improving the measurement of DER costs and benefits, implementing pricing models that reflect the actual value of energy based on time and location, and adapting utility business models toward either an 'incentive regulation' or 'network utility' approach.

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 evaluates the first two phases of the EU ETS, finding that while it successfully capped emissions, its actual abatement impact was modest (40–80 MtCO2/yr) and heavily influenced by the 2008-2009 financial crisis. It notes that the system failed to drive large-scale long-term low-carbon investment due to price volatility and over-allocation. The analysis also highlights significant 'windfall profits' in the power and industrial sectors resulting from free allowance allocations and the pass-through of carbon costs to consumers. The document concludes by suggesting strengthening measures such as price floors and set-asides, and reviews similar emerging schemes in jurisdictions like Australia, China, and the USA.

The report analyzes the global shift in carbon pricing dynamics away from a US-centric model toward Asia-Pacific initiatives, including Korea, Australia, and Chinese pilot schemes. It argues that while the US Federal government remains deadlocked, other industrialised nations must implement carbon pricing to avoid stranded assets and maintain international credibility. Using the EU ETS as a primary case study, the document highlights the effectiveness of cap-and-trade in delivering operational emission savings and the importance of 'easing policies' like free allocation to protect trade-exposed, carbon-intensive industries. It emphasizes that carbon pricing is a 'necessary but not sufficient' tool, requiring complementary measures such as energy efficiency programs and strategic revenue recycling to support low-carbon innovation. The author suggests that regional cooperation and the potential for 'border levelling' measures after 2020 may be necessary if global agreements fail.

The report argues that the EU ETS has failed to provide a sufficient carbon price signal for low-carbon investment due to a massive surplus of allowances caused by the recession and complementary energy policies. It proposes a triad of measures: setting aside allowances to recalibrate the market, implementing a rising reserve price on auctions to create a price floor, and accelerating negotiations for 2030 climate goals.

The document argues that the 'nexus' of water, energy, and climate requires integrated modeling tools to avoid unwanted policy consequences. To address this, the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) linked its WEAP and LEAP systems. A California case study simulating the use of desalinated seawater to meet 5% of Southern California's urban water demand by 2049 found that while desalination could reduce water imports by approximately 300 million cubic meters per year in normal years, it would increase the water sector's electricity use by about 3 terawatt-hours and greenhouse gas emissions by 1.4 million tonnes of CO2e per year by 2049.

The document analyzes the water-energy nexus, highlighting that while low-carbon technologies are essential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, some may require as much or more water than fossil-fuel generation. It distinguishes between water withdrawal and consumption, noting that cooling systems (once-through, wet-recirculating, and dry) significantly influence water demand. A California case study demonstrates that a standard Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) can reduce emissions and withdrawals but may increase water consumption; however, a strategic 'RPS+Technology' approach—prioritizing solar PV over solar thermal and adopting dry-cooling and carbon capture and sequestration (CCS)—can simultaneously reduce emissions and water use.

The Stockholm Environment Institute has integrated two existing software tools, WEAP and LEAP, to address the 'water-energy nexus'—the interdependency where water is required for energy production and energy is required for water management. While WEAP models water demand and supply and LEAP handles energy and greenhouse gas mitigation planning, their integration allows planners to analyze tradeoffs, such as the energy intensity of desalination or the water requirements of concentrating solar power, which were previously difficult to assess using the tools in isolation.

The report analyzes the 'water-energy nexus,' highlighting how the transition to low-carbon electricity can create new pressures on water resources. It compares the water withdrawals and consumption of conventional fossil-fuel plants, nuclear power, and various renewables. A case study of California's Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) demonstrates that while shifting to renewables can reduce emissions, certain choices—like solar thermal—can increase water consumption. The authors argue for integrated planning that prioritizes low-water technologies, efficiency improvements, and water recycling to ensure energy security without compromising water availability.