Search Climate Insights Directory

The 34th Meeting of the IAI Executive Council established its leadership for two years, approved previous action items and the current agenda, and initiated the development of electronic voting procedures and amendments to voting and accreditation rules.

The report identifies a critical gap between climate science outputs and the operational needs of transportation practitioners. It argues that adaptation requires not only improved climate data—such as updated precipitation atlases and sea-level rise projections—but also a deep understanding of local non-climate factors like infrastructure elevation and soil saturation. The document emphasizes the need for a 'central clearinghouse' of information, better 'Climate-to-English' translation of scientific terms, and the integration of climate risk into existing asset management and budgeting processes. It highlights various pilot projects and tools, including the FHWA Risk Assessment Model and Toronto's Climate Change Risk Assessment Tool, as pathways toward increasing the adaptive capacity of transportation systems.

One year after the Fukushima Dai-ichi disaster, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) evaluates U.S. nuclear safety. While the NRC's initial response was commendable, the UCS argues that the agency has critically mismanaged the implementation of its Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) recommendations by relegating the foundational reform of the 'beyond-design-basis' regulatory framework to the end of its priority list. The report warns that the nuclear industry's voluntary 'FLEX' program may preempt necessary safety standards, and that U.S. reactors remain vulnerable to severe natural disasters and terrorist attacks due to outdated emergency procedures and insufficient equipment hardening.

The report analyzes 15 significant safety-related 'near-misses' at U.S. nuclear plants in 2011, arguing that many resulted from owners tolerating known safety problems. While it highlights successful NRC interventions at the Fort Calhoun, Hatch, and LaSalle plants, it criticizes the agency for allowing 47 reactors to operate in violation of fire-protection regulations and 27 reactors to operate with deficient seismic protection. The author contends that the NRC often focuses on fixing individual equipment failures rather than addressing the systemic weaknesses in owners' testing and inspection regimes.

The report finds that U.S. thermoelectric power plants withdrew between 60 billion and 170 billion gallons of freshwater daily in 2008, with coal plants accounting for the majority of this use. It identifies significant regional disparities in water intensity, noting that plants in the East generally withdraw more water due to a higher prevalence of once-through cooling. The analysis reveals that power plants contributed to water-supply stress in 20% of the 400 stressed watersheds identified. Furthermore, the report highlights critical gaps and inaccuracies in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data, including the total absence of reporting from the nuclear fleet. It argues that climate change and population growth will exacerbate these stresses, urging a shift toward low-water cooling technologies and low-carbon energy sources to ensure grid reliability and ecosystem health.

The report finds that U.S. power plants withdraw massive volumes of freshwater, with coal and nuclear plants being the most water-intensive. This demand contributes to water-supply stress in hundreds of watersheds and is exacerbated by droughts and heat waves. The authors highlight significant gaps and inaccuracies in EIA reporting and advocate for 'water-smart' energy choices, such as dry cooling and low-water renewables, to ensure energy reliability and water security.

The report documents the presence of hexavalent chromium, a known carcinogen, in leachate from coal ash disposal sites and groundwater across the United States. It highlights a discrepancy between the EPA's recognition of the chemical's toxicity in drinking water and its failure to account for ingestion risks in its coal ash risk assessments. The document provides evidence from EPA, DOE, and EPRI studies showing that chromium leaching from coal ash is nearly 100% hexavalent and often exceeds safety standards by thousands of times. It concludes that the EPA must designate coal ash as a hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act to protect public health.

The document presents data on the freshwater requirements of U.S. power plants, highlighting that coal and nuclear power are the primary consumers of freshwater for cooling. It details the distribution of cooling systems across the U.S. and identifies specific watersheds where power plant water use significantly impacts the Water Stress Index (WaSSI).

The document examines the technology and global status of offshore wind energy, noting that while Europe leads in operational capacity, the United States has significant untapped potential. It details the technical requirements for different water depths, the regulatory frameworks in countries like Denmark, and the specific siting and permitting complexities in the U.S. The text also addresses public concerns regarding tourism, wildlife, and military radar, while highlighting the economic benefits in terms of job creation and greenhouse gas reduction.

The author expresses concern that the Obama administration may sacrifice the EPA's regulatory authority over greenhouse gas emissions to ensure the passage of a Senate climate bill. The text highlights political opposition from figures like Senator Lisa Murkowski and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, while noting the efforts of Senators Kerry, Lieberman, and Graham to draft a bill. It emphasizes that a multi-tool approach—combining legislative action with EPA regulation—is essential to meet climate goals and maintain economic competitiveness.

The document analyzes the challenges facing the U.S. advanced biofuels industry, including the 'valley of death' between pilot projects and commercialization, volatile petroleum prices, and regulatory uncertainties. It argues that while the federal government provides essential broad-scale support, state governments are uniquely positioned to guide the industry by leveraging local geography and resources. The report proposes ten specific policy options for states, ranging from resource inventorying and sustainable feedstock guidelines to the implementation of low carbon fuel standards and interagency cooperation, highlighting examples from states like California, Oregon, and Tennessee.

Dr. Hyde Merrill provides expert testimony challenging the technical necessity of the $1.8 billion PATH transmission project. He argues that PJM Interconnection's reliability claims are based on flawed planning, inaccurate extrapolations, and undocumented changes in assumptions. Specifically, he asserts that alleged voltage issues could be resolved with capacitors costing $40 million, and that thermal violations on lower-voltage lines could be fixed for approximately $66 million. He further claims that 500-kV thermal violations are speculative, based on unreliable extrapolation rather than contingency analysis, and ignore available generation and demand-side management resources. Merrill concludes that the project would increase reliance on remote coal-fired power and recommends a strategic shift toward local renewables and gas-fired plants.

As of 2006, fossil fuels accounted for 68% of Virginia's energy consumption, with approximately 78% of electricity generation derived from fossil fuels. Between 1990 and 2005, state greenhouse gas emissions increased by 15%, a growth rate slower than the U.S. average, with 91% of 2005 emissions resulting from energy consumption.

The document argues that a national energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) is the most cost-effective way to meet new energy needs in Virginia. By 2020, such a standard could result in $2.3 billion in energy savings, the creation of over 3,700 jobs, and a reduction of 7.5 million metric tons of CO2 emissions. Additionally, Virginia could reduce electricity consumption by 13% by 2015, which would cover 62% of the projected increase in demand.

The Southeast United States faces significant challenges in balancing water and energy needs due to population growth and frequent droughts. Thermoelectric power plants are the region's largest freshwater consumers, while water heating and treatment are major energy drivers. The document advocates for integrated policy priorities, including the adoption of water-efficient energy technologies, energy-efficient public buildings, and financial incentives for high-performance products like ENERGY STAR and WaterSense labels.

The document highlights the interdependence of water and energy in Virginia, noting that thermoelectric power plants account for 75% of the state's freshwater withdrawals. It proposes policy priorities including the prioritization of low-water energy technologies, the adoption of ENERGY STAR and WaterSense products, and the implementation of water recycling and solar water heating. It also quantifies the energy costs of water heating and treatment, suggesting that widespread adoption of high-efficiency fixtures could save millions in bills.

The Southeast United States accounts for 20% of U.S. energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, with a heavy reliance on fossil fuels (80%) and high per capita electricity use. Rapid population growth is projected to increase energy demand, particularly in electricity generation, which already constitutes 45% of regional energy consumption. The region's dependence on imported fossil fuels exposes it to price volatility and supply disruptions, while its emissions profile makes it a significant global contributor to climate change.

The Southeast United States has sufficient renewable energy resources to meet up to 30 percent of its electric power needs by 2025. The region can leverage biomass, solar, wind, and low-impact hydropower to reduce reliance on conventional power, though this requires overcoming regulatory barriers such as restrictive third-party power pricing and insufficient interconnection rules. The document argues that a national or state-level renewable electricity standard (RES) would drive job growth and economic investment with minimal impact on consumer electricity costs.

The document argues that energy efficiency is the most cost-effective way to meet rising electricity demand in the Southeast US, potentially reducing expected use by 20% by 2025. It identifies regulatory and financial barriers and recommends the adoption of Energy Efficiency Resource Standards (EERS), updated building codes, and alternative utility business models to drive investment across residential, commercial, and industrial sectors.

The document explains how nuclear power plants use water to absorb waste heat and cool equipment, detailing once-through and closed-cycle cooling systems. It highlights the significant volumes of water required, the environmental impact on aquatic life, and the critical role of the Ultimate Heat Sink (UHS) during accidents. The author argues that the primary safety hazard is not radioactive leakage, but rather the failure of water to reach the plant or leaking into the plant.