Search Climate Insights Directory

Annapolis, Maryland, has experienced a more than fourfold increase in tidal flooding since 1970, with the City Dock flooding approximately 50 times per year. Sea levels in Annapolis have risen by over a foot in the last century, more than twice the global average. Projections indicate that by 2045, the city could face over 360 flood events annually. In response, the city is collaborating with agencies such as NOAA, FEMA, and the Army Corps of Engineers to assess vulnerability and study at-risk structures, while the U.S. Naval Academy is coordinating with state and local officials to address sea level rise as a national security issue.

The Sierra Club and Chesapeake Climate Action Network oppose Exelon's acquisition of Pepco Holdings, Inc., asserting that the proposed settlement is insufficient. They argue that Exelon's solar commitments are merely statutory obligations, its financial health is questionable, and the merger would conflict with Maryland's renewable energy goals. The brief claims that the acquisition offers negligible ratepayer savings while introducing substantial risks to the public interest.

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 report evaluates the NRC's 2014 safety oversight, noting a decline in the number and severity of 'near misses' but criticizing the agency for withholding safety documents, retaliating against whistleblowers, and applying inconsistent oversight standards across different regions.

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.

A joint letter from the Attorneys General of New York, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont requests that the EPA establish methane emission standards for the distribution sector. The states argue that excluding this sector undermines the climate benefits of the Clean Power Plan and cite an EPA Inspector General's report stating that voluntary industry efforts have failed and that distribution leaks cost consumers approximately $192 million in 2011.

A joint statement from the Attorneys General of New York, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont urging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish formal emission standards and guidelines for methane in the oil and gas sector following the publication of five technical white papers.

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 Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) evaluates the NRC's 2013 performance, noting a decrease in the number and severity of 'near-misses' but highlighting critical inconsistencies in enforcement. While the NRC successfully managed the restart of the Fort Calhoun plant and identified gaps in aging component oversight, it is criticized for allowing the Diablo Canyon and Oconee plants to operate despite known seismic and fire safety risks, and for improperly withholding information regarding the Jocassee Dam's potential to cause a total meltdown at Oconee.

The document analyzes state green banks as quasi-governmental financial institutions designed to leverage public funds to increase private investment in clean energy and energy efficiency. It details the operational model of Connecticut's CEFIA, highlighting its use of credit enhancements and diverse financing tools to bridge the 'deployment gap' for commercially available technologies. The paper also reviews emerging green bank models in New York, Vermont, and Hawaii, while discussing the systemic benefits and drawbacks of state-level financing authorities.

The report segments Marylanders into six climate change audiences: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. In spring 2013, 62% of residents fell into the Alarmed (23%) and Concerned (39%) categories. The study finds high polarization regarding local environmental changes and health risks, while identifying broad support for renewable energy and the protection of public water supplies. It details the demographic and behavioral profiles of each segment to inform state climate and energy policy communication.

The 2014 Maryland statewide survey reveals that while a majority of residents support state action to protect coastal areas from sea level rise and general climate harms, there is significant uncertainty regarding whether sea level rise is currently occurring and what causes it. Preferred adaptation strategies include changes to zoning regulations and long-range planning. Residents identify hotter weather and severe storms as the most likely local climate impacts, with agriculture, public health, and coastlines viewed as the most at-risk resources.

The report finds that a large majority of Marylanders favor increasing the use of renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, while expressing a desire to reduce the use of coal and petroleum. While there is strong support for state mandates requiring renewable energy percentages and for financial rebates on energy-efficient appliances, there is low interest and participation in home energy audits due to cost and awareness barriers. Additionally, the survey reveals a significant gap in support for natural gas depending on whether it is extracted via hydraulic fracturing within the state.

The 2014 survey of Maryland residents indicates a strong public perception that climate change harms human health, particularly through respiratory issues and heat stroke. While medical professionals are highly trusted sources of information, residents perceive fossil fuels and nuclear power as health hazards, contrasting with a view of solar and wind energy as non-harmful. The report also notes an increase in concern regarding chemical exposure and pollution, and identifies health care access and environmental health as top state policy priorities.

A 2014 statewide survey of Maryland residents reveals that 77% believe climate change is happening, with 55% viewing a particularly cold winter as evidence of this trend. While there is strong support for state-level energy efficiency and renewable energy policies, there is significant division regarding whether human activities are the primary cause of climate change. Trust in climate information is highest among university scientists, public health experts, and specific state agencies, while trust is lowest for the Governor's office and utility companies. Awareness of specific state climate policies has declined since 2013.

The U.S. Highway Trust Fund (HTF), which relies on federal fuel taxes that have not been adjusted since 1993, is facing insolvency due to rising costs and declining fuel consumption. The document argues that current funding is insufficient, contributing to a 'D' grade for national infrastructure and an annual funding gap of $112 billion. It evaluates several solutions, including indexing fuel taxes to inflation or construction costs, increasing the per-gallon tax rate, and transitioning to a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) fee to better align costs with infrastructure wear, particularly from heavy trucks.

The U.S. Highway Trust Fund (HTF), which relies on fuel taxes unchanged since 1993, faces insolvency due to rising costs and declining fuel consumption. The document argues that current funding is insufficient to maintain a state of good repair, citing a $112B annual funding gap. It evaluates several solutions, including indexing fuel taxes to inflation, increasing the per-gallon tax rate, implementing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) fees, or shifting to a fuel sales tax, while highlighting the interdependence of highway and transit systems for economic efficiency.

Earthjustice and the Sierra Club successfully opposed the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) project, leading American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy to withdraw their application in 2011. The project would have constructed 275 miles of high-voltage lines from West Virginia through Virginia to Maryland to support coal-fired power plants, including the John E. Amos plant. Opponents argued the lines were unnecessary due to energy efficiency gains and would have increased air pollution and mountaintop removal mining in Appalachia.