Search Climate Insights Directory

The document identifies approximately 2 million mobile homes built before 1976 as the "worst housing stock" in the U.S., noting they are energy-inefficient and often house low-income, elderly, or disabled residents. It highlights that these structures are often ineligible for traditional weatherization programs and proposes the Energy Efficient Manufactured Housing Act of 2009 to provide rebates for ENERGY STAR qualified homes. The text details the differences between mobile, manufactured, and modular homes, and provides demographic data on residents of pre-1980 manufactured housing.

The clean car standards, initiated by California's AB 1493 and adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), comprise regulations for air quality, global warming, and zero-emission vehicles. These standards aim for a 30% reduction in global warming pollution from new vehicles by 2016 and are more stringent than federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, targeting a fleet average fuel economy equivalent of 39.2 mpg by 2020 compared to the federal 35 mpg. As of January 2009, 13 states and the District of Columbia had adopted these standards, which are projected to reduce cumulative global warming emissions by 451 million metric tons of CO2E by 2020 across those 15 jurisdictions.

The report argues that RGGI's design, which caps emissions only for power plants within participating states, creates a price advantage for imported electricity from coal-heavy states like West Virginia and Pennsylvania. This 'leakage' is exacerbated by excess capacity in existing coal plants and planned transmission upgrades that facilitate power flow from west to east. The authors suggest that RGGI states should implement retail-level carbon caps, prohibit contracts with high-emission plants, and prioritize transmission projects aligned with climate goals to prevent the expansion of coal-based power.

The author contends that nuclear power is an unsuitable solution for global warming due to the catastrophic precedent of Chernobyl and ongoing risks. Key concerns include the lack of permanent repositories for high-level nuclear waste, the vulnerability of spent-fuel storage to terrorism, and the risk that civilian nuclear programs serve as covers for weapons proliferation. The document suggests that investing in end-use energy efficiency is seven times more cost-effective at reducing demand than nuclear power.

Friends of the Earth welcomes the Supreme Court's decision to review a 2003 EPA ruling that denied the agency's authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. The organization argues that the lack of regulation has coincided with a 16 percent increase in global warming emissions since 1990 and contributed to severe weather events and economic losses, such as the $57.6 billion in insurance losses from 2005 hurricanes.

The Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning System (LEAP), developed by the Stockholm Environment Institute, is an integrated modelling tool used in over 150 countries for energy policy analysis and greenhouse gas emission tracking. It supports both demand-side and supply-side methodologies, allowing users to create medium to long-term scenarios (typically 20 to 50 years) to evaluate the environmental and social impacts of various policy options. LEAP is distributed free of charge to academic, governmental, and non-profit organisations in the developing world and is used by more than 85 countries for reporting to the UNFCCC.

The document advocates for wind power as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels and nuclear energy, particularly in New England. It details the severe environmental and health costs of conventional energy—including CO2 emissions, air pollution, water consumption, and land degradation—while positioning wind energy as a low-impact solution with minimal land footprints and no operational emissions.

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 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 report argues for a 'fair share' approach to renewable energy siting to replace traditional state-level preemption, which often burdens rural communities. It outlines core principles—such as allowing communities to opt out after meeting a state-assigned target and ensuring all regions contribute—and analyzes how similar mandates in affordable housing (e.g., in Massachusetts and New Jersey) have increased supply despite local resistance. The authors identify key differences between energy and housing, such as the larger physical footprint and specific resource potential of energy projects, and provide a roadmap for policy design and implementation.

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 document argues that integrating public health and equity into climate policy can broaden political support and save lives, estimating that low-carbon policies could avoid 1 million American deaths annually. It proposes a roadmap of legislative and agency actions, including banning natural gas expansion, transitioning to regenerative agriculture, and electrifying public transit, to align the U.S. with the Paris Agreement's 1.5C target. The brief emphasizes that health co-benefits could offset 10% to 41% of U.S. mitigation costs.

The report, produced by a consortium of medical societies, alerts the public and policymakers that climate change is already causing direct and indirect health harms across the United States. It identifies vulnerable populations, such as children and the elderly, and details how extreme heat, weather events, air pollution, and the spread of infectious diseases impact public health. The document advocates for the acceleration of a transition to clean renewable energy as the most critical action to protect health and provide immediate co-benefits like improved air and water quality.

The document asserts that approximately $18.74 billion has been spent on over 700 miles of border wall that is ineffective at stopping drug trafficking or irregular crossings. It highlights that 83 laws have been waived to expedite construction, leading to the destruction of tribal cultural sites and critical wildlife habitats. A 2024 study in Arizona showed an 86% reduction in wildlife crossings due to the wall, and the text notes an increase in severe injuries and deaths from falls.

The letter criticizes Leonard Green & Partners for aggressive financial policies at Prospect Medical Holdings, including dividend recapitalizations and a controversial $10 million buyout. It highlights a dramatic decline in EBITDA, high debt levels, and poor hospital quality ratings, arguing that these actions prioritize short-term private equity gains over long-term healthcare stability and patient care.

The report argues that the private equity (PE) industry uses aggressive financial engineering to extract short-term value from companies, a process facilitated by specific U.S. tax loopholes. Key mechanisms include the carried interest loophole, interest deductions, and fee waivers, which allow PE managers to pay significantly lower tax rates than ordinary workers. The document provides case studies in housing, healthcare, energy, and labor to illustrate the negative impacts of this model, such as increased hospital mortality rates, the proliferation of high-emission LNG terminals, and the degradation of manufactured housing parks.

The report provides a state-by-state breakdown of progress toward 2020 Clean Power Plan benchmarks, noting that some states have exceeded 500% of their goals while others show 0% progress. It highlights the role of energy efficiency, renewable energy standards, and regional initiatives in achieving these targets.

The report outlines strategies for U.S. companies to adopt on-site renewable energy, focusing on solar, wind, geothermal, and solar thermal technologies. It details various ownership and financing models—ranging from direct ownership to third-party power purchase agreements—and analyzes the associated financial incentives, operational risks, and corporate benefits such as cost hedging and brand enhancement.

The document outlines four types of solar metering arrangements designed to overcome the limitations of the traditional "one customer, one meter" model. Net metering provides benefits to a single customer via one meter. Virtual net metering (VNM) allows multiple customers with separate meters to share credits from a system, often in multi-tenant or municipal buildings, and is permitted in states including California, Colorado, and Massachusetts. Community solar enables joint ownership or sponsorship of systems for those unable to host arrays on-site, utilizing models such as utility-sponsored, special purpose entity, or non-profit "buy a brick" projects. Meter aggregation allows a single customer with multiple utility accounts to aggregate annual consumption across separate buildings, enabling the installation of larger systems and higher power sales back to the grid.