Search Climate Insights Directory

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.

Waterkeepers Washington and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations are urging the Governor of Washington to establish protective water quality standards based on actual fish consumption rates. They argue that the current rate of 6.5 grams per day is inadequate and fails to protect citizens, particularly high-consumption communities, from toxic pollution in waterways like the Duwamish and Columbia rivers.

The report argues that rising temperatures and drier conditions in the American West, combined with a trend of building homes in wildfire-prone areas, have led to longer fire seasons and soaring suppression costs. It highlights a misalignment of incentives where federal taxpayers bear the brunt of firefighting costs while local zoning allows risky development. The document details the broad economic impacts of wildfires—extending far beyond direct suppression to include public health crises, infrastructure damage, and tourism losses—and recommends a shift toward resilience, stricter building codes, and carbon emission reductions.

The U.S. plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) market is characterized by rapid growth, with sales increasing 85 percent between 2012 and 2013. The market is dominated by four models: the Nissan LEAF, Chevrolet Volt, Toyota Prius Plug-in, and Tesla Model S. While PEVs produce no tailpipe emissions and generally lower greenhouse gas emissions than gasoline vehicles, challenges remain regarding charging infrastructure and the high cost of battery packs. Federal and state incentives, including tax credits up to $7,500, are used to improve commercial viability.

The document describes the U.S. plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) landscape in 2014, distinguishing between all-electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). It highlights that while PEVs represent less than 1% of new vehicle sales, they are the fastest-growing segment, with sales increasing 85% from 2012 to 2013. The text details specific models like the Nissan LEAF and Tesla Model S, discusses the necessity of expanding public charging infrastructure, and notes a downward trend in battery costs. Additionally, it outlines federal tax credits and various state-level incentives designed to encourage PEV adoption.

CIEL argues that TTIP would allow the chemical industry to weaken safety regulations and limit access to critical health and safety data. The statement highlights the divergence between the U.S. risk-based approach and the EU's hazard-based REACH system, asserting that regulatory harmonization would likely result in lower standards. CIEL also warns that Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms would enable corporations to bypass domestic courts and challenge public interest laws, creating a 'regulatory chilling effect'.

The report introduces 'governAbilities' as the nexus of sustainability, accountability, and adaptability, arguing that these three operational areas are essential for governments to maintain a 'social licence to operate' in a complex, uncertain century. It identifies four common principles—outcome-based, multistakeholder, forward-looking, and multi-dimensional—that link these abilities. To operationalize these, the authors propose a toolkit including Budgeting for Outcomes, Indicator Information Systems, Multistakeholder Councils, Scenario Planning, and Integrated Strategies. The report provides global case studies, such as Germany's sustainability reporting and Washington State's budgeting process, to demonstrate how these tools can be implemented to improve public management and policy resilience.

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 briefing outlines a strategic policy framework for California to maintain its climate leadership and reach its 2050 emissions targets. It emphasizes the need for a 2030 carbon cap to provide investment certainty and recommends specific reforms: transitioning utilities to performance-based regulation, implementing energy labels for existing buildings, enhancing the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and establishing 'gold standard' methane emissions regulations. The authors also advocate for regional cooperation with other U.S. states and technical collaboration with China to scale clean energy technologies globally.

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 Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) develops consumption-based accounting tools, such as multi-regional input-output (MRIO) models, to reveal environmental costs often ignored by territory-based emissions tracking. SEI argues that while consumers play a role, systemic shifts driven by government and business are essential to overcome infrastructure and business models that lock in unsustainable patterns. Their research also highlights how complex global supply chains can transfer vulnerabilities and environmental risks between producer and consumer regions.

The document discusses the shift toward regulatory-based climate policies in both Canada and the U.S., emphasizing the need for 'equivalency' in measuring carbon reductions across different provincial and state systems. It analyzes the economic impact of proposed Canadian oil and gas regulations, noting that a 40/40 target (40% reduction with a $40 price ceiling) would cost significantly more than a 20/20 target. Finally, it suggests Canada is unlikely to meet its 17% emissions reduction target for 2020 due to delayed oil and gas regulations and increasing energy sector emissions.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) warns that TTIP may hinder public health and safety goals by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could lower chemical safety standards. The document highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH approach and the US's risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that trade-driven 'regulatory coherence' often results in a 'lowest-common denominator' outcome. It further cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which could allow corporations to sue governments over environmental laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-national regulations in the US and EU. Finally, it suggests that a US-EU agreement could negatively influence the development of chemical regulations in other regions, such as the BRIICS countries.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), on behalf of several environmental organizations, warns the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance that TTIP may prioritize trade interests over public health. The document highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH regulation and the U.S.'s risk-based Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), arguing that harmonization or mutual recognition could lead to a 'lowest-common denominator' approach to chemical safety. It specifically opposes investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which it claims allow corporations to sue governments over public interest laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-federal laws in the U.S. and national laws in EU member states. Finally, it suggests that a restrictive TTIP could discourage other nations, particularly BRIICS countries, from adopting more stringent chemical safety standards.

The document warns that TTIP may prioritize trade interests over public health by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could lower chemical safety standards in the U.S. and EU. It specifically contrasts the EU's hazard-based REACH regulation with the U.S.'s risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that mutual recognition would effectively erase protections for chemicals restricted in only one jurisdiction. The author also cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which could allow corporations to sue governments over public interest laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-federal or sub-regional laws. Finally, the statement suggests that a low-standard TTIP could chill the development of stringent chemical regulations in other regions, such as the BRIICS countries.

The document warns that TTIP may prioritize trade over public health by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could weaken chemical safety standards. It highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH approach and the US's risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that mutual recognition would effectively erase protections unique to one jurisdiction. The author also cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and the preemption of sub-national laws, while noting that TTIP could negatively influence chemical regulations in non-member countries like the BRIICS nations.

A coalition of environmental and health organizations petitions the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to move beyond project-specific reviews and undertake a comprehensive area-wide Environmental Impact Statement for proposed coal export terminals in the Pacific Northwest. The petitioners argue that the combined capacity of approximately 100 million metric tons of coal per year creates systemic risks to rail infrastructure, public health, and global climate that cannot be adequately assessed on a site-by-site basis.

The document details the U.S. effort to reach a goal of one million electric vehicles by 2015 through the development of 'deployment communities' and infrastructure. It describes federal initiatives like the Transportation Electrification Initiative and Clean Cities, regional efforts such as the Northeast Electric Vehicle Network, and commercial fleet adoptions by companies like Frito Lay and General Electric. It also lists specific legislative proposals aimed at increasing consumer tax credits and funding for community deployment and fleet upgrades.

The document details US efforts to reach a goal of one million electric vehicles by 2015, focusing on federal, state, and local deployment programs, the role of commercial and government fleets, and proposed legislation to incentivize PEV adoption and infrastructure.

The document describes the technical operation of battery electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), noting that a range of 60 to 120 miles can satisfy the vast majority of daily travel needs. It details the 2012 U.S. market, highlighting the Chevrolet Volt and Nissan LEAF as dominant models and comparing specifications for several other vehicles. The text analyzes the economic impact of battery costs, the necessity of charging infrastructure, and the role of federal and state tax credits in making PEVs commercially viable.