Search Climate Insights Directory

The document explains how wind energy integrates into the New England electricity grid to displace polluting fossil fuels, particularly natural gas, oil, and coal. It highlights the importance of siting turbines in high-wind areas to maximize pollution reduction and discusses policy mechanisms like cap-and-trade and renewable portfolio standards to accelerate the transition to clean energy.

The document identifies wind power as the most cost-effective near-term option for increasing renewable electricity in New England, noting that the region's onshore wind resources have the technical potential to supply approximately 60 percent of its current electricity use. It frames this within the broader need to transform the energy system to limit global warming, noting that the Northeast United States emits more CO2 than all but six countries globally. While other solutions like energy efficiency and carbon capture are discussed, wind is presented as more viable than solar, bioenergy, or geothermal power in the region due to cost and resource availability. The document states that if all currently proposed wind projects in New England were completed, they would generate over 5,700 gigawatt-hours of CO2-free electricity annually, representing about seven percent of the electricity used in the proposing states.

The document outlines the potential for wind energy in New England, emphasizing that the region has "excellent wind resources, particularly on mountain ridges and along the coast." It details the criteria for optimal siting—primarily wind speed, topography, and proximity to transmission lines—and highlights economic benefits such as tax revenues for towns and lease payments for landowners. The text addresses environmental concerns, noting that modern turbines cause significantly fewer bird fatalities than other human structures and that wind power does not reduce property values. It also discusses human impacts, including visual aesthetics, noise, and aviation lighting, while noting that 81 percent of surveyed Vermont residents find turbines "beautiful or acceptable."

The document outlines the environmental and economic benefits of wind energy in New England, noting that over 60 percent of the region's electricity was generated from fossil fuels in 2005. It explains how wind power integrates into the grid via ISO New England to displace more expensive and polluting plants, particularly oil-fired plants during winter peaks. The text highlights that 18 proposed wind projects with a total capacity of 1,890 MW could avoid millions of tons of pollution annually, including over 3 million tons of CO2. It also discusses the importance of siting for efficiency and the role of policy mechanisms like cap-and-trade and renewable portfolio standards in accelerating the transition.

The document examines the failures of the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the subsequent emergence of state-level regulations in the U.S. to manage industrial chemicals. It highlights how state actions, such as bans on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), are influenced by international frameworks like the EU's REACH regulation and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. The author argues that these 'twin levers' of state and international progress are essential for driving the U.S. toward a more sustainable national chemical policy by 2020.

The document outlines how U.S. consumers can support renewable energy via green pricing, green marketing, and Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). It contrasts the environmental benefits of renewables—such as wind, solar, and geothermal—against the pollution and health risks associated with coal, oil, nuclear power, and natural gas. It also provides tools for verifying green power claims, including the Green-e certification and the Power Scorecard tool.

The document advocates for the adoption of the Solis bill (H.R. 4800) to implement the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants in the United States. The signatories argue that the Solis bill ensures timely EPA action, adopts a health-based regulatory standard, and respects state-level protections. In contrast, they claim the Gillmor bill (H.R. 4591) would weaken safeguards by introducing cost-benefit standards and preempting state regulations.

The report argues that the U.S. federal framework for chemical regulation, primarily the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), is fundamentally flawed and overdue for reform. It highlights that TSCA allows the majority of chemicals on the market to escape scrutiny and limits the EPA's ability to ban substances. While federal political polarization hinders national reform, the document identifies 'scattered sunshine' in the form of proactive state legislation (notably in California and Maine), the influence of the European Union's REACH regulation, and a shift among some U.S. businesses toward safer alternatives to maintain global competitiveness. It concludes that while the immediate political climate is challenging, long-term pressure from international standards and state-level 'laboratories' makes comprehensive reform inevitable.

A coalition of environmental and health organizations calls on the U.S. Congress to ratify the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). The authors argue that U.S. absence from the treaty harms its international reputation and limits its influence over the convention's success. They propose three criteria for implementing legislation: ensuring timely action on new POPs, respecting state-level environmental laws, and granting the EPA clear legal authority to act without redundant evaluations or cost-benefit balancing tests.

The testimony by the Clean Air Task Force (CATF) urges the U.S. Senate to oppose the Clear Skies Act (CSA), claiming its emission caps for sulfur, nitrogen, and mercury are too weak and implemented too late to protect public health and the environment. CATF presents modeling showing that alternative proposals, such as the Clean Power Act, would result in significantly fewer deaths by 2020 with negligible increases in retail electricity prices. The document further argues that CSA fails to address carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and would effectively repeal critical Clean Air Act provisions, including New Source Review and visibility protections for National Parks. It concludes that the EPA already possesses the authority to achieve greater gains through existing rules like the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and mercury MACT standards.

The document records a multi-sector call for a U.S. transition to clean energy, arguing that government investment and regulation can simultaneously drive economic growth, reduce oil dependence, and address climate change.

The document provides legal arguments to support the legitimacy of California's MTBE ban in the arbitration between Methanex Corporation and the United States. It contends that international law, including the precautionary principle and the right to potable water, mandates deference to government health and environmental regulations. The authors argue that foreseeable impacts on foreign investors or the existence of alternative measures do not prove discriminatory intent under NAFTA Chapter 11.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) graded U.S. states on their commitment to renewable energy, finding that 34 states received failing grades (D or F) and only 16 passed. While 19 states have enacted standards or funds projected to add 15,215 MW of capacity by 2017, the gains are highly concentrated, with California and Texas accounting for nearly 60 percent of forecasted new development. The report argues that current state-level efforts are insufficient compared to the technical potential of wind, solar, bioenergy, geothermal, and landfill gas, and advocates for a national renewable electricity standard to achieve more equitable and cost-effective energy generation.

The report evaluates U.S. state commitments to renewable energy, finding that while technical potential is vast, most states lack binding policies. It grades states based on renewable electricity standards (RES) and funds, noting that a small number of states, led by California and Nevada, drive most projected gains, while 34 states received failing grades. The authors argue for a national renewable electricity standard to ensure equitable and cost-effective growth.

The report asserts that while the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments reduced sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, ecosystems in North America remain damaged due to a 150-year accumulation of acidic compounds. It documents ongoing damage to aquatic life, forests, and wildlife, and argues that biological recovery requires emission cuts up to 80 percent beyond the 1990 mandates. The authors state that affordable technologies, such as scrubbers and renewable energy, are available to achieve these deeper reductions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists identifies seven policy tools—Renewables Portfolio Standards, public benefits funding, net metering, fair transmission/distribution rules, fair pollution rules, consumer information, and green customer demand—to transition the US to renewable energy. It argues that deregulation risks favoring fossil fuels unless these mechanisms internalize the public benefits of renewables and remove market barriers.

The document outlines how states can leverage billions of dollars in federal funding to support the transition to zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (MHDVs). It categorizes funding opportunities into manufacturing, procurement, charging infrastructure, workforce development, emissions monitoring, and state planning, providing specific program details, eligibility, and strategic next steps for state officials.

The document examines the application of environmental taxes, fees, and charges across different sectors in the U.S., including water, air, solid waste, and hazardous waste management. It distinguishes between revenue-raising taxes and cost-offsetting fees, noting that while many instruments are designed to recover administrative costs, some—such as the federal tax on ozone-depleting chemicals and certain state-level hazardous waste taxes—have demonstrated significant incentive effects in reducing pollution. The report also details specific state-level experiments with variable-rate waste collection and wetland compensation fees.

The report examines the CropLife-ECPA proposal for regulatory convergence under TTIP, asserting that the pesticide industry is attempting to use trade negotiations to compel the European Union to abandon its precautionary, hazard-based approach to pesticide regulation in favor of the less stringent risk-assessment model used in the United States. The author argues that this would lead to higher pesticide residues on food, the continued use of endocrine disruptors, and the failure to protect bee populations. Furthermore, the report claims the proposal would restrict public access to safety data and usurp the regulatory authority of US states and EU Member States to implement stronger local protections.

The document examines the legislative hurdles preventing the United States from ratifying the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). It analyzes four proposed bills intended to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), concluding that only the Solis TSCA bill (H.R. 4800) aligns with the treaty's health-based standards and supports state-level environmental protections.