Search Climate Insights Directory

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that shifting from conventional farming to practices that create 'spongelike' soils—such as using cover crops and perennial crops—can significantly reduce flood runoff and increase water availability during droughts. A meta-analysis of 126 experiments showed that 70 percent of cases using these practices saw increased water infiltration. Modeling for Iowa suggests that converting one-third of cropped acres (the least profitable and most erodible) to continuous cover could have reduced runoff by 20 percent during the 2011 Missouri River floods and increased crop water availability by up to 16 percent during the 1988 and 2012 droughts. The report calls for federal policy changes to the USDA and crop insurance programs to incentivize these soil management practices.

The provided text consists of appendices detailing an optimization model to assess the scalability of diversified crop rotations in Iowa, the potential for substituting corn with oats and alfalfa in livestock feed, and methodologies for calculating soil erosion and greenhouse gas emissions. It argues that longer rotation systems can maintain profitability while improving soil health and reducing pollution. The analysis includes specific scenarios for converting corn acreage in the most erodible counties and across the entire state, utilizing non-linear models to estimate nitrous oxide (N2O) reductions and carbon sequestration benefits.

The report analyzes the benefits of diversified crop rotations compared to the dominant corn-soybean system in the US Corn Belt, specifically focusing on Iowa. Based on research from Iowa State University's Marsden Farm, the authors find that three- and four-year rotations increase yields for corn and soybeans and maintain similar net profits while reducing herbicide and synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use. The report models the scalability of these systems, suggesting that implementing no-till diverse rotations on 3.6 million of Iowa's most erodible acres could reduce soil erosion by 91% and save taxpayers up to $198 million annually in water cleanup costs. It further suggests that up to 40% of Iowa's farmland could be converted to these systems if livestock feed markets adapt. To overcome financial, market, and technical barriers, the report recommends expanding USDA incentives, improving Whole Farm Revenue Protection insurance, and increasing funding for agroecological research.

The document argues that replacing a portion of Midwest corn and soybean acreage with diverse crop rotations—including oats and alfalfa—can increase yields and maintain profits while significantly reducing soil erosion, chemical runoff, and greenhouse gas emissions. Based on Iowa State University research and Union of Concerned Scientists modeling, the report suggests that such systems could be scaled to 20-40% of Iowa's farmland, potentially saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in water cleanup costs. However, adoption is hindered by market, financial, and technical barriers, necessitating federal policy reforms in crop insurance, USDA loan funding, and agricultural research.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) developed the Clean Energy Momentum State Ranking to evaluate how US states are driving the transition to clean energy. The ranking uses 12 metrics across three categories: technical progress (renewable energy generation, energy savings, and electric vehicle sales), direct effects (job creation and pollution reduction), and future-oriented policies (renewable energy, energy efficiency, and carbon reduction). California is identified as the overall leader, while Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Hawaii also rank in the top five. The analysis concludes that state-level leadership is critical for national momentum, particularly in creating jobs and improving public health, and recommends that states facilitate business involvement and improve energy equity for low-income communities.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) evaluated the 50 US states using 12 indicators to rank their progress in clean energy, focusing on renewable energy generation, energy efficiency, and transport electrification. California leads the ranking, followed by Vermont and Massachusetts. The analysis highlights that clean energy progress is tangible across the US, with wind farms in 41 states and over half a million electric vehicles on the road. The report argues that state-level leadership is critical for job creation and public health improvements, and recommends that states adopt multi-dimensional policies, facilitate corporate participation, and improve energy equity for low-income and minority communities.

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 how urban transportation infrastructure in Alberta is vulnerable to rising temperatures and extreme weather, such as flooding and heat waves. It argues that resilience can be achieved through 'robustness' (using tools like the PIEVC protocol and green infrastructure), 'redundancy' (diversifying transportation modes and fuel sources), and 'resourcefulness' (engaging citizens via mobile apps and supporting shared mobility). The briefing recommends that Calgary and Edmonton undertake full vulnerability assessments, promote compact urban forms, and implement multi-modal networks to mitigate climate risks.

Agricultural runoff of nitrogen and phosphorus is a primary driver of water contamination and eutrophication in the U.S., particularly affecting the Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico. While the Clean Water Act does not regulate water leaving farmers' fields, various state-level initiatives and federal programs, such as the USDA's Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), promote voluntary best management practices to reduce nutrient loading. Climate change is expected to worsen these issues by increasing the frequency of extreme weather events that trigger higher runoff.

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that US farm and food policies are uncoordinated and often work at cross-purposes, leading to economic stagnation in rural areas, environmental degradation, and high public health costs. The brief urges the Trump administration to realign these policies to ensure access to healthy, sustainably produced food while supporting the livelihoods of farmers and food system workers.

Agricultural runoff of nitrogen and phosphorus is a primary driver of water contamination, leading to eutrophication and hypoxic zones in the Gulf of Mexico and Great Lakes. Climate change is expected to worsen this by increasing the frequency of heavy rains and subsequent nutrient runoff. While the Clean Water Act does not regulate water leaving farmers' fields, various state-level voluntary and mandatory programs, alongside the federal Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), aim to reduce nutrient loading through best management practices like cover crops and no-till operations.

The document examines how US farm subsidies, specifically the Federal Crop Insurance Program, encourage wasteful farming practices that lead to widespread nitrogen pollution. It details the resulting costs to public health, water utilities, and coastal industries, while proposing a transition to integrated prairie strips to reduce runoff and save taxpayers and farmers billions of dollars.

The document examines the decline of midsize family farms in the U.S., using Iowa as a primary case study, and proposes a national food policy to connect these farms with institutional buyers to create jobs and improve environmental sustainability.

The Union of Concerned Scientists proposes a green bank for Michigan, estimating that an initial public investment of $105 million could leverage $3.3 billion in total clean energy investments by 2030. This financial mechanism would support the deployment of 685 MW of solar capacity and reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions by 3.9 million tons, contributing 13% of the emissions reductions required for the state to meet Clean Power Plan targets. The document outlines various financial products the bank could offer, such as credit enhancements and warehousing, and identifies existing Michigan programs that could be integrated into this structure.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzes how a hypothetical Pennsylvania green bank, with an initial $135 million capitalization, could leverage $4.2 billion in total investment by 2030. This initiative would support 780 MW of wind and solar capacity, save $375 million annually on electricity bills, and reduce CO2 emissions by 4.8 million tons per year, contributing 11% of the state's required reductions under the Clean Power Plan.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analyzes how a hypothetical Virginia green bank with $90 million in initial capitalization could leverage $2.8 billion in total investment by 2030, significantly reducing carbon emissions and supporting the deployment of 575 MW of wind and solar capacity.

The report examines clean energy financing tools used by six U.S. states and Germany to scale up renewable energy and energy efficiency investments. It highlights the role of 'green banks' and other mechanisms in reducing financial risks for the private sector and overcoming barriers like high upfront costs and limited technical understanding among financiers. Case studies include Connecticut and New York's green banks, Pennsylvania and Kentucky's use of the Warehouse for Energy Efficiency Loans (WHEEL), Iowa's revolving loans, and Massachusetts's Mass Save HEAT Loan. The report concludes that these tools can help states achieve Clean Power Plan targets by leveraging limited public funds to attract significant private capital.

The report details the application of natural capital science and software tools across various sectors to integrate ecosystem services into decision-making. Key examples include the Inter-American Development Bank's infrastructure planning in Latin America, China's massive reforestation and zoning efforts, and corporate sustainability initiatives by Dow, Unilever, and Coca-Cola. It highlights the role of the Natural Capital Project's open-source tools, such as InVEST and OPAL, in quantifying the trade-offs between economic development and the preservation of natural assets like watersheds and coastal habitats.

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 how the U.S. economy can benefit from reducing greenhouse gas emissions in electric generation, electricity consumption, passenger vehicles, natural gas, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). It highlights cost savings for consumers and businesses, the decreasing cost of renewable energy and electric vehicle batteries, and the potential for increased industry revenues through methane leak reduction.