Search Climate Insights Directory

The report uses Energy Policy Simulator modeling to analyze seven major federal policy shifts occurring between January 2025 and May 2026. The findings indicate that these changes will lead to increased energy costs, diminished public health outcomes, constraints on new power generation, and greater financial pressure on utilities and households through 2040.

The report models the effects of several federal policy reversals—including the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), the repeal of EPA greenhouse gas and tailpipe emissions standards, and the cancellation of the Solar for All grant program—predicting significant economic losses and increased consumer costs. Key findings include a projected $650 billion increase in household energy payments, a cumulative GDP loss of $2.3 trillion, and the loss of 820,000 jobs per year on average over the next decade. The analysis also forecasts a 26 percent increase in gasoline prices by 2040 and $43 billion in additional healthcare costs due to worsening air pollution. To mitigate these impacts, the report suggests state-level actions such as accelerating wind and solar procurement, removing permitting barriers, and supporting electric transportation and building efficiency.

The analysis finds that recent federal policy shifts—including the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) and the repeal of various EPA standards—will lead to higher energy costs for households, significant GDP and job losses, and increased healthcare spending due to worsening air pollution. While a temporary boom in renewables is expected due to safe-harbor tax credit rules through 2030, the report forecasts a sharp contraction in clean energy capacity and a continued reliance on coal power after 2031.

The document asserts that clean energy provides lower costs and less risk for meeting growing electricity demand compared to existing federal policy approaches. It criticizes the federal government for forcing aging coal plants to remain operational, investing in expensive new gas plants, and repealing tax credits for wind and solar power, which disrupts investment plans and stalls clean power projects.

A national analysis comparing two futures for U.S. electricity demand growth through 2030 finds that a clean energy approach is significantly cheaper than a fossil fuel-heavy one. Relying on fossil fuels would add $29.7 billion annually to customer bills by 2030, whereas a clean energy scenario would reduce overall costs by $5.1 billion annually compared to the high fossil scenario. Furthermore, clean energy provides a hedge against price shocks; in a scenario similar to the 2022 price spike, clean energy would yield total savings of $13.5 billion per year compared to fossil fuel reliance.

This research paper proposes that India can develop a cost-competitive sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) industry using power-and-biomass-to-liquids (PBtL) technology, leveraging low-cost green hydrogen and agricultural residue to reduce crude oil imports and aviation emissions.

India is uniquely positioned to produce cost-competitive sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) using a power-and-biomass-to-liquids (PBtL) pathway. By combining low-cost green hydrogen—enabled by plummeting solar and battery costs—with abundant agricultural residue, India can produce SAF that is more cost-effective and has lower carbon intensity than competing technologies like HEFA, ATJ, BtL, and PtL. Analysis indicates that a 2030 PBtL project could produce SAF at costs 40% lower than recent fossil jet fuel prices, with parity potentially reached in the 2030s. Beyond decarbonization, this approach reduces dependence on crude oil imports (currently 90% of supply) and mitigates severe air pollution caused by open-field residue burning, which is linked to 44,000 to 98,000 premature deaths annually. The brief recommends government support through first-of-a-kind demonstration projects near Delhi, Pune, and Mumbai airports, the use of trade policies to access EU and UK markets, and the implementation of incentives based on the social cost of carbon and avoided health costs from air pollution.

The report argues that meeting U.S. electricity demand growth through 2030 with a clean energy portfolio is more affordable and reliable than a fossil-fuel-heavy approach. Modeling shows that a clean energy scenario could save consumers $5.1 billion annually by 2030 and significantly reduce risks associated with volatile fuel prices and extreme weather. The analysis emphasizes the role of solar, wind, battery storage, and demand-side flexibility in reducing system costs and carbon emissions while maintaining grid resilience.

The report compares two pathways for meeting U.S. electricity demand growth through 2030: one relying on fossil fuels and another on clean energy. It finds that a clean energy scenario reduces the incremental cost of meeting demand by $5.1 billion annually in 2030 and offers greater protection against fuel price volatility. To realize these savings, the authors recommend setting ambitious clean energy targets, updating electricity system planning with market-based assumptions, reducing permitting and interconnection barriers, implementing fuel cost sharing to manage risk, improving grid utilization through technologies like surplus interconnection and high-performance conductors, and harnessing demand-side resources such as virtual power plants and distributed energy technologies.

The report argues that India is uniquely positioned to lead in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production via the power-and-biomass-to-liquids (PBtL) pathway. By combining world-leading low-cost green hydrogen (driven by cheap solar power) with an abundance of surplus agricultural residue, India can produce SAF at costs significantly lower than global benchmarks. The analysis shows that PBtL is more resource-efficient and has a lower carbon intensity than other pathways like HEFA, ATJ, and BtL. The report projects that PBtL SAF could reach price parity with fossil aviation turbine fuel (ATF) in the 2030s, providing a hedge against crude oil price volatility and reducing air pollution from crop residue burning. It identifies regions around Delhi, Pune, and Mumbai airports as ideal for first-of-a-kind demonstration projects.

This report by Energy Innovation analyzes the economic and environmental potential of electrifying industrial heat in India, arguing that solar-powered electrification is often the cheapest energy option and can significantly reduce pollution and energy use.

The document provides a collection of infographics focused on the electrification of industrial heat in India. It argues that smart policies can leverage inexpensive solar energy to make electric heat cheaper than most fossil fuel alternatives, thereby reducing both manufacturing costs and air pollution.

The document argues that heat pumps are a cost-effective alternative to gas heating due to their superior energy efficiency, which allows them to overcome higher electricity costs. In the residential sector, heat pumps have outsold gas furnaces for four consecutive years. In the industrial sector, they are particularly viable for low-temperature processes (under 200°C), with the potential to increase U.S. GDP by over $42 billion by 2030. The briefing concludes that other alternatives, such as hydrogen and renewable natural gas, are less scalable and more expensive than heat pumps.

The Industrial Transformation Technology and Investment Model (ITTIM) is an Excel-based tool that estimates energy use, CO2 emissions, and capital investment needs for industrial decarbonization. It employs a six-tier cumulative technology framework—ranging from energy efficiency to clean chemical feedstocks—to mitigate 97% to 99% of industrial emissions. The model currently supports datasets for China, India, Indonesia, Viet Nam, the Philippines, and the United States, allowing users to simulate various scenarios including carbon pricing and different hydrogen cost projections.

The report argues that industrial electrification in India is economically viable across all temperature ranges when powered by low-cost solar energy. It finds that switching to electric technologies like heat pumps and thermal batteries can reduce industrial energy use by 22% and cut CO2 emissions by over half. The analysis highlights that solar-powered electrification is already cheaper than petroleum and natural gas across all temperatures and competitive with coal in several bands. To scale this transition, the report recommends streamlining Green Energy Open Access rules, reducing electricity cross-subsidies, and implementing production-linked incentives for clean commodities.

This report describes the role of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) as one of three primary technological categories for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the industrial sector, specifically within the United States.

The policy brief advocates for a hierarchical approach to industrial decarbonization in the United States, prioritizing energy efficiency and electrification over carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS). It argues that CCUS should be limited to niche uses because it fails to address upstream emissions, captures only about 90 percent of CO2, and prolongs fossil fuel infrastructure. The document identifies six high-priority CCUS use cases, dividing them into long-term solutions for process emissions and bioenergy, and short-term solutions for blue hydrogen production, high-temperature heat, high-purity CO2 streams, and new efficient facilities.

The report highlights a trend of massive infrastructure spending by both electric and gas utilities in the U.S., which is driving up consumer energy bills. While the electric sector has a 'full toolbox' of regulatory and technical solutions to manage costs, the author contends that gas utility solutions are 'more nascent and uncharted.' The document proposes the use of a gas system analysis (GSA) to provide the foundational technical information necessary for decision-makers to avoid investing in redundant or irrelevant long-lived assets.

The report proposes a Gas System Analysis (GSA) framework to counter rising consumer costs and risks associated with massive gas infrastructure investments. It outlines a three-part process: depicting current system characteristics, defining future scenarios (including business-as-usual and alternative pathways), and forecasting impacts on costs, emissions, and public health. The framework aims to prevent stranded assets and support the transition to clean heat through electrification and non-pipeline alternatives.

The report critiques the 'firm fixation' approach where utilities meet surging data center demand by adding gas plants or refurbishing coal units. It identifies six defining features of data centers—agency, clustering, consumption profiles, flexibility, backup requirements, and modularity—that make them unsuitable for simple one-to-one matching with firm power plants. Instead, the author advocates for a 'system of systems' approach combining clean energy portfolios, battery storage, and demand-side flexibility. Key recommendations for policymakers include using the interconnection process as leverage to ensure cost causation and exploring demand-side resources, such as sponsoring household energy upgrades, to free up grid capacity.