Search Climate Insights Directory

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) analysis finds that two-thirds of U.S. states may be exposing electricity consumers to financial risks due to overreliance on natural gas. These risks include price volatility, potential carbon pricing costs, and the possibility of stranded assets such as underused plants and pipelines. The report rates states across five categories, identifying Florida as the only state with a "High" risk rating in all five. To mitigate these risks, the report advocates for prioritizing renewable energy and energy efficiency over natural gas as a primary solution for carbon reduction under the federal Clean Power Plan.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed 50 U.S. states to identify those at high risk of natural gas overreliance in the power sector. The analysis uses five metrics: the share of in-state electricity production from natural gas in 2014, the increase in that share from 2008 to 2014, the share of new capacity being built from natural gas (2014–2017), total projected natural gas capacity in 2017, and 2013 power sector carbon dioxide emissions. The report highlights that excessive reliance on natural gas exposes ratepayers to fuel price volatility and the risk of 'stranded assets' from infrastructure that may become underused or abandoned. It also notes that a shift from coal to gas is insufficient for long-term climate goals due to continued significant emissions upon combustion.

A coalition of 290 organizations and individuals opposes H.R. 1734, asserting that the bill would weaken the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 2014 coal ash rule. The signatories argue the legislation would delay health protections, eliminate public access to information, and remove national standards for drinking water protection, thereby increasing risks to vulnerable communities and the environment.

The document explains that green bonds are fixed-income instruments where proceeds are earmarked for projects with environmental benefits, such as renewable energy and energy efficiency. It details four main types of green bonds—'use of proceeds' bonds, revenue bonds, project bonds, and securitized bonds—and notes that the majority are 'use of proceeds' bonds backed by the issuer's entire balance sheet. The market grew significantly from $11bn in 2013 to $36.6bn by the end of 2014, with major issuers including the European Investment Bank and the World Bank. While the 'Green Bond Principles' provide best practice guidelines, the document highlights a lack of universal definitions for 'green' projects, a gap the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI) is addressing with sector-specific standards. For investors, green bonds offer a way to meet ESG objectives without necessarily taking on additional project-specific risk, though the secondary market remains thin due to a 'buy-and-hold' investor base.

The report examines the transition of the U.S. power sector from coal to natural gas, noting that while this shift provides immediate benefits, it introduces risks such as price volatility, methane leakage, and potential 'stranded assets'. Using the National Energy Modeling System, the analysis compares a 'Business as Usual' scenario with a 'Carbon Standard plus Renewables and Efficiency Policies' scenario. The findings suggest that the latter would reduce power plant carbon emissions by 70 percent below 2005 levels by 2040, lower consumer energy bills, and provide significant net societal benefits, reaching nearly $170 billion by 2040.

The report examines the transition of the U.S. power sector from coal to natural gas, highlighting that while this shift provides immediate reductions in some pollutants, it creates long-term risks including price volatility, methane leakage, and stranded assets. Through modeling three scenarios—Business as Usual, a Carbon Standard, and a Carbon Standard plus Renewables and Efficiency Policies—the authors find that a diversified energy mix is the most economically and environmentally sound approach. The 'Carbon Standard plus Renewables and Efficiency Policies' scenario is projected to reduce power plant carbon emissions by 70% below 2005 levels by 2040 and generate net societal benefits of nearly $170 billion by that year. The report recommends strengthening the EPA's Clean Power Plan, implementing federal renewable electricity and energy efficiency standards, and increasing regulations on fugitive methane emissions.

The report argues that TTIP's regulatory cooperation provisions, primarily based on EU proposals, would institutionalize oversight of US state-level legislation and regulations by federal and international bodies. This framework would likely lead to 'regulatory chill' through onerous procedural requirements, such as early warning systems and trade impact assessments, which favor industry influence over public interest. The document highlights that US states often act as the primary regulators of toxic chemicals and pesticides when federal action is lax, and that TTIP's goal of 'regulatory compatibility' could effectively set federal or international standards as a ceiling, preventing states from adopting more protective measures. It specifically warns that such mechanisms could be used to challenge state-level bans on substances like Bisphenol A (BPA) or pesticide residue monitoring programs in California.

The document outlines the GSA's National Deep Energy Retrofit (NDER) Program and provides a framework for achieving energy savings of 50% or more in federal buildings. It highlights the effectiveness of bundling energy conservation measures (ECMs), engaging diverse stakeholders, and utilizing a 'technical potential' tool to identify aggressive energy goals. Case studies, such as the Almeric Christian Federal Building, demonstrate the feasibility of net-zero energy through the ESPC process, while data analysis shows that NDER projects achieved an average of 38% energy savings, more than double the 18.5% average of non-NDER federal ESPC projects.

The report evaluates the vulnerability of North American monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) to climate change, identifying high sensitivity to temperature and a critical dependence on milkweed. While the species possesses high adaptive capacity due to dispersal ability and reproductive rates, it faces significant threats from habitat loss, pesticide use, and extreme weather. Recommended strategies focus on restoring milkweed and nectar sources, protecting overwintering forests in Mexico and California, and increasing population monitoring.

The author opposes S. 1966, claiming it would mandate logging in up to 25 percent of designated "logging emphasis areas," leading to the loss of at least 7.5 million acres over 15 years. The text argues the bill eliminates judicial review and environmental safeguards, threatens drinking water supplies in the West, and provides less revenue for rural communities than the Secure Rural Schools Act of 2000.

The report details the expansion of solar energy in the U.S., focusing on rooftop photovoltaic (PV) systems, large-scale PV, and concentrating solar power (CSP). It highlights significant cost reductions, the role of state and federal incentives, and the environmental benefits of transitioning from fossil fuels to solar, while addressing grid integration challenges and land-use impacts.

The document criticizes the Obama administration's 2017-2022 planning process for offshore oil and gas exploration, arguing that such activities contradict climate goals and threaten marine ecosystems. It highlights the potential for 60 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions from undiscovered reserves and the risk to marine mammals from seismic surveys. The author calls for a total moratorium on new offshore leasing to ensure the transition to low-carbon energy and to avoid the economic and environmental risks associated with oil spills.

The document highlights how human-induced climate change is damaging U.S. cultural heritage, including prehistoric shell mounds in Florida, the historic districts of St. Augustine, and multiple NASA research and launch facilities. It emphasizes that sea-level rise and extreme weather are already causing structural damage and operational disruptions, calling for urgent national resources for adaptation and mitigation.

The report introduces 'governAbilities' as the nexus of sustainability, accountability, and adaptability, arguing that these three operational areas are essential for governments to maintain a 'social licence to operate' in a complex, uncertain century. It identifies four common principles—outcome-based, multistakeholder, forward-looking, and multi-dimensional—that link these abilities. To operationalize these, the authors propose a toolkit including Budgeting for Outcomes, Indicator Information Systems, Multistakeholder Councils, Scenario Planning, and Integrated Strategies. The report provides global case studies, such as Germany's sustainability reporting and Washington State's budgeting process, to demonstrate how these tools can be implemented to improve public management and policy resilience.

The report highlights the vulnerability of iconic U.S. landmarks to climate-driven events. It details how sea level rise and storm surges threaten coastal sites like the Statue of Liberty and Jamestown, while increased heat and drought drive destructive wildfires in the West, affecting sites like Mesa Verde. The authors argue that climate resilience must become a national priority, requiring both resource allocation for site protection and a reduction in carbon emissions to mitigate future risks.

The report examines the vulnerability of iconic U.S. landmarks to climate change, highlighting risks such as sea level rise in coastal cities and increased wildfire activity in the Southwest. It argues for urgent national priority in climate resilience and carbon emission reduction to protect cultural heritage.

The report analyzes 2013 cable news segments from CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC, finding significant disparities in scientific accuracy. MSNBC had the highest accuracy rate (92%), followed by CNN (70%) and Fox News (28%). The authors argue that misleading coverage, particularly the use of 'false debates' on CNN and the disparagement of scientists on Fox News, hinders democratic dialogue on climate policy by conflating established scientific facts with political opinions.

The report examines the systemic failure of the U.S. coastal insurance market, specifically the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which provides subsidized rates that encourage risky development and create massive taxpayer liability. It highlights how climate change—manifesting as sea level rise and stronger hurricanes—is exacerbating these risks, particularly along the East and Gulf Coasts. The author advocates for the full implementation of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 and further measures, such as incorporating sea level rise projections into FEMA flood maps and providing targeted support for low-income homeowners.

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 2013 update to the 'Ripe for Retirement' report identifies that up to 329 coal-fired generators (58.7 GW) in 38 U.S. states are no longer economically competitive with existing natural gas plants, and up to 71 GW are uncompetitive with new wind power. These units, combined with those already retired or announced for retirement, represent more than one-third of the country's coal-generating capacity. The analysis suggests that a combination of renewable energy, energy efficiency, and underutilized natural gas plants can replace this capacity, though the authors warn against overdependence on natural gas due to climate and economic risks.