Search Climate Insights Directory

The research finds that phasing out U.S. federal fossil fuel leases could reduce global CO2 emissions by approximately 100 million tonnes per year by 2030. The impact is most immediate for coal, where it could leave 4 billion short tons of coal in the ground by 2040. Oil and gas impacts are more gradual due to longer project lead times, but could eventually leave 7 billion barrels of oil and 30 trillion cubic feet of gas undeveloped by 2040. The study concludes that such supply-side measures are a significant complement to demand-side policies like the Clean Power Plan in meeting Paris Agreement targets.

The document analyzes the evolution of ethanol use in the U.S., noting that while E10 blends have reduced oil dependence, corn-based ethanol causes significant environmental damage and can spike global food prices. It argues for a shift toward advanced biofuels derived from wastes, agricultural residues, and perennial crops to lower lifecycle emissions and protect biodiversity. The report forecasts that by 2050, emissions from biorefineries, agriculture, and land use can be substantially reduced through technological optimization and smarter crop choices.

The document analyzes the climate impact of phasing out federal fossil fuel leases in the U.S. It finds that while current policies project an 11% increase in production by 2040, a 2°C pathway requires a 40–60% reduction. Ceasing new federal leases could reduce global CO2 emissions by approximately 100 million tonnes per year by 2030, primarily through reduced coal and offshore oil production.

The report identifies 'climate equity hotspots' along the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts, where projected sea level rise and tidal flooding combine with socioeconomic risks such as poverty and minority population share. It argues that federal and state agencies must prioritize these vulnerable communities in funding and infrastructure investments to ensure an equitable response to climate change. The analysis evaluated thirty-five coastal counties across nine states and provides case studies for five specific locations, including Dorchester County, MD, and Plaquemines Parish, LA, to illustrate the challenges of environmental injustice and sinking lands.

The document argues that the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) has failed to meet its goals of producing clean renewable fuels and protecting consumers, instead primarily incentivizing corn ethanol. It highlights negative impacts including increased greenhouse gas emissions from land conversion, water pollution in the Mississippi River Basin and Gulf of Mexico, and increased food prices and land displacement in developing countries and the United States.

Investors and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) have formally requested that Chevron Corporation improve its public disclosures regarding the physical risks climate change poses to its coastal refineries. The authors argue that Chevron's SEC Form 10-K filings fail to address material risks such as sea level rise and enhanced storm surges, despite the vulnerability of specific sites like the Pascagoula, Mississippi and Kapolei, Hawaii refineries. They highlight that the 2005 damage to the Pascagoula refinery from Hurricane Katrina demonstrates the potential for material impacts on production and cash flows.

A letter from investors and the Union of Concerned Scientists to Exxon Mobil requesting disclosure of physical climate risks to coastal refineries, citing SEC guidance and the vulnerability of specific Texas and Louisiana facilities to sea level rise and storm surges.

Investors and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) are calling on Marathon Petroleum to improve its public disclosures regarding the physical risks of climate change. They argue that the company's SEC Form 10-K filings fail to address the vulnerability of coastal refineries to sea level rise and storm surges, despite evidence of past disruptions and scientific projections for the Gulf of Mexico.

A letter from investors and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) to Valero Energy Corporation requesting the disclosure of physical climate risks at its coastal refineries. The authors argue that Valero has failed to report material risks related to sea level rise and storm surge in its SEC Form 10-K filings, despite the vulnerability of facilities in Texas and Louisiana and previous disclosures made by the former owner of the Meraux refinery.

The document outlines the technical approach used by the Union of Concerned Scientists to analyze climate risks at specific refineries owned by Valero, Phillips 66, Exxon Mobil, Marathon Petroleum, and Chevron. It details the data sources for refinery capacity and boundaries, the sea level rise projections based on the IPCC's RCP 4.5 scenario, and the use of the National Weather Service's SLOSH model to simulate storm surge from Category 1–5 hurricanes. Additionally, it explains the criteria used to score company disclosures of physical climate risks based on SEC filings and Ceres methodology.

The report examines the vulnerability of U.S. coastal oil refineries to sea level rise and storm surge, focusing on five major companies: Valero, Phillips 66, Exxon Mobil, Marathon Petroleum, and Chevron. It argues that these companies fail to adequately disclose material physical climate risks to the SEC, despite guidance issued in 2010. The analysis uses SLOSH MOM modeling to demonstrate that current and future sea level rise increases the likelihood of facility inundation and operational disruptions. The report highlights the resulting financial risks for investors and the environmental and health risks for neighboring communities, particularly those in the Gulf Coast region.

The document argues that the Port of Seattle improperly used a SEPA categorical exemption to avoid environmental review for an interim lease of Terminal 5 to Foss Maritime. The authors contend that using the terminal as a home port for Shell's Arctic drilling fleet—including vessels like the Noble Discoverer—would change the site's use from a container terminal to a shipyard, risking toxic runoff and water pollution that could harm threatened Puget Sound Chinook salmon. The letter further highlights Shell's poor safety record in the Arctic and the broader climate implications of Arctic oil exploration.

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 research argues that existing assessments of the Keystone XL pipeline overlook the 'price effect,' where increased oil supply lowers global prices and induces higher consumption. Using a supply-and-demand model, the authors find that if the pipeline enables production that would not otherwise reach the market, it could increase global GHG emissions by up to 93 million tCO2e per year by 2020. This impact is significantly higher than the emissions resulting solely from the higher carbon intensity of oil sands compared to other crudes.

The document details how global average sea level has risen 8 inches since 1880, noting that the US East Coast and Gulf of Mexico are hotspots due to ocean current changes and land subsidence. It highlights the accelerating role of land ice melt—which contributed 75 to 80 percent of the total increase between 2003 and 2007—and asserts that future sea level rise will be primarily driven by the loss of ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctica.

The study concludes that nutrient trading in the MRB is economically feasible, as wastewater utilities could significantly reduce costs by purchasing credits from the agricultural sector. Using case studies of two utilities and six agricultural watersheds, the report finds that nitrogen (N) supply is sufficient to meet demand, while phosphorus (P) supply is more limited. It highlights that some conservation practices are profitable for farmers even without trading due to fertilizer savings and yield increases. However, the report notes that the lack of a strong policy driver, potential local water quality standards, and regulatory capacity are significant barriers to implementation.

The analysis argues that the Keystone XL pipeline's impact on global GHG emissions may be significantly higher than previously estimated if it increases global oil supply and lowers prices, which in turn stimulates demand. The authors model three scenarios regarding whether oil sands production would reach the market via alternative transport if the pipeline were rejected. In the case where no oil would otherwise reach the market, the study finds that global oil use could increase by up to 510,000 barrels per day, leading to an annual increase in GHG emissions of up to 93 million tCO2e. This potential increase is four to five times greater than the emissions resulting from simply displacing average crude with oil-sands crude and represents roughly 10% of the U.S. government's pledged emission reductions for 2020.

The report estimates the annual value of improving Florida's water quality between $1.3 billion and $10.5 billion, highlighting the severe economic and ecological impacts of nutrient pollution and harmful algae outbreaks.

The document highlights the climate risks associated with increased oil and gas production in the Arctic, specifically the emissions of methane and black carbon. It argues that the Arctic is uniquely vulnerable, with temperatures rising at twice the global average, and that the potential for an 'oil and gas rush' could exacerbate this. The authors propose a series of technical and policy interventions to mitigate these impacts, including the elimination of venting, the use of vapor recovery units, the adoption of ultra low sulfur diesel, and the establishment of standardized monitoring and reporting protocols.

The statement criticizes the decision to allow oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean, highlighting the vulnerability of endangered species and Native subsistence communities. It argues that a spill would be catastrophic because the nearest coast guard station is over a thousand miles away and existing cleanup tests have been a "complete failure". The author calls for the President to use his authority to delay drilling until science proves that spills can be cleaned up safely.