Search Climate Insights Directory

The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) argues that the 2007 Farm Bill should transition agriculture policy to treat renewable energy as a core component. The report identifies a gap between the authorization of programs in the 2002 Farm Bill and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the actual appropriations provided. It recommends expanded funding for biomass research, the creation of a national biomass assessment, and incentives for small-scale, farmer-owned biorefineries to ensure rural economic benefits. Additionally, it proposes enhancing federal procurement of biobased products and implementing a Renewable Portfolio Standard of 25 percent by 2025.

EESI and the National Plug-In Partners Campaign critique the DOE's draft PHEV R&D Plan for being insufficiently aggressive in its deployment timelines and for omitting smart grid capabilities. They argue that existing industry progress from companies like General Motors and Tesla proves that PHEVs can be brought to market faster than the DOE's projections. The authors recommend that the DOE accelerate its battery development phases and require all demonstration vehicles to be "smart grid-capable" to enable future vehicle-to-grid (V2G) functionality.

A fact sheet from the Environmental and Energy Study Institute detailing the costs, benefits, and federal funding mechanisms for hybrid-electric buses in the United States as of 2007.

The document outlines Dr. James E. Hansen's testimony on climate change, highlighting that the United States is the largest source of CO2 emissions and that current 'Business-as-Usual' trends could lead to at least 5°C of warming by 2100. It warns of non-linear ice sheet disintegration in Greenland and West Antarctica, potentially causing sea level rises of 25±10 meters if warming reaches 2-3°C. Hansen argues that abrupt climate changes are practically certain under current emission trends, but an 'Alternative Scenario' could keep warming below 1°C if CO2 emissions are moderately reduced by mid-century and peak by 2100.

Buildings account for 40% of total annual U.S. energy consumption and 48% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S. federal government operates over 500,000 buildings, which used 1.7 quads of energy in 2004, though the Federal Energy Management Program predicts a funding shortfall of over $2 billion for energy-efficiency projects. The document also highlights several high-performance buildings in the U.S. and Europe that achieved significant energy and water savings through sustainable technologies.

The document details the health impacts of radon, lead, mold, and volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) in buildings, particularly schools. It highlights that indoor pollutant levels often exceed outdoor levels and notes the significant financial costs of poor air quality, contrasted with the potential billions of dollars in savings from building improvements and increased worker productivity.

The document outlines various financial mechanisms to transition the U.S. bus fleet away from diesel. It details federal programs managed by the DOT, DOE, and EPA, as well as state-specific initiatives in Texas, California, and New York, emphasizing that combining different grants can significantly reduce the incremental cost of advanced technologies like hybrid-electric buses.

The document reports a decline in US automotive fuel economy from a 1987 peak of 22.1 mpg to approximately 21 mpg in 2005, attributed to increased vehicle weight, horsepower, and the popularity of SUVs and light trucks. It details advanced technologies for efficiency gains, including aerodynamics, low-rolling-resistance tires, hybrid drivetrains, weight reduction, and direct-injection stratified charge (DISC) engines. Additionally, it highlights the impact of basic maintenance—such as tire pressure, air filter replacement, and engine tuning—on fuel economy, and notes that increased efficiency reduces foreign oil dependence and greenhouse gas emissions.

The document details how whole building design and climate-responsive architecture reduce energy consumption. It highlights specific features such as cool roofs, tight building shells, and Energy Star appliances, noting that energy-efficient homes can reduce heating, cooling, and hot water costs by 30 to 40 percent compared to conventional new homes. It also addresses barriers to adoption, including the high cost of retrofitting existing buildings and the lack of federal energy codes.

Concentrating solar power (CSP) uses mirrors to focus sunlight to generate electricity, offering the lowest cost among solar technologies at $0.09 to $0.12 per kWh for plants over 10 MW. The document details three primary technologies: trough systems, power tower systems, and dish systems, noting that trough and tower systems can store heat for use after dark. While the US has significant potential—specifically in the Southwest—high capital costs and the requirement for direct sunlight remain primary challenges. The US Department of Energy projects costs could drop to $0.04 to $0.05 per kWh in the coming decades.

The document describes geothermal energy as the third largest renewable energy source, noting that the United States is the world's largest producer with 2,800 MW of connected capacity. It details three power plant technologies—flash steam, dry steam, and binary cycle—alongside direct-use and heat pump applications. Key benefits include base load power availability and significantly lower CO2 emissions compared to coal, though the document notes risks such as land subsidence and induced seismicity.

The document describes hydropower as a low-cost energy source providing 20 percent of global electricity and 7-9 percent of US electricity. It details three primary technologies—impoundment, diversion, and pumped storage—and notes that nearly 80 percent of US renewable energy comes from hydropower. While it offers pollution prevention and domestic energy security, the sector faces challenges including federal relicensing barriers, drought-related capacity reductions, and negative impacts on aquatic habitats and land use.

The document details how the US industrial sector, which consumes over one-third of national energy, can reduce usage through technologies like combined heat and power, adjustable speed drives, and improved steam and compressed air systems. It highlights energy savings in five key industries—aluminum, chemicals, forest products, glass, and steel—and provides case studies from the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport and Sara Lee Corporation to demonstrate the financial and environmental benefits of efficiency upgrades.

The document outlines various ocean energy technologies, including tidal dams, fences, turbines, wave energy converters, and Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC). It highlights existing installations in France, China, and Canada, and notes that while these resources are renewable and pollution-free, they face challenges such as high capital costs, specific site requirements, and potential impacts on sea life migration.

The document describes photovoltaic (PV) systems as semiconductor-based technology that converts sunlight into electricity. It highlights that PV is viable across most of the United States, with the potential for a 90-mile square station to meet the country's peak demand. Key benefits include the prevention of greenhouse gas emissions, the creation of high-technology jobs, and increased domestic energy security. While utility-scale costs range from $0.20 to $0.30 per kWh, the document notes that high upfront capital costs and intermittent power remain primary issues, though these can be mitigated by battery storage and utility-scale experimentation projects.

The document outlines how solar architecture—comprising passive and active systems—can be used globally to reduce energy costs and pollution. It details specific technologies like Trombe walls and sunspaces, noting that new office buildings can reduce energy costs by 30 to 50 percent. While active solar heating systems have higher initial costs than electrical systems, they are projected to pay for themselves within 7 to 10 years.

The document describes solar water heating systems, which use solar collectors and storage tanks to provide hot water, space heating, and air conditioning. In the United States, over 1.5 million homes and businesses use these systems, with a potential for 29 million installations if 40% of homes have sufficient sunlight. The technology is categorized into direct and indirect systems for temperature management, and passive (thermosiphons) and active (pump-based) systems for circulation. While initial costs are higher than conventional heaters ($1,500–$3,500 versus $150–$450), they typically pay for themselves within 4 to 8 years through energy savings. Environmental benefits include the prevention of over 50 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per unit over 20 years.

The document outlines the state of the US wind energy sector as of 2006, noting that installed capacity reached 6,740 MW in 2004. It highlights the role of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) in driving growth and reducing costs to between $0.03 and $0.06 per kWh. The text compares onshore and offshore wind potential, discusses the environmental benefits of avoiding carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide emissions, and notes that the US has been surpassed by Germany, Spain, Denmark, and the UK in wind capacity and technology development.

As of early 2006, the U.S. wind industry had a generating capacity of 9,149 MW, with 2005 seeing a 35 percent growth in capacity. The document details various federal incentives, including the Production Tax Credit (PTC) and Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBS), as well as state-level mechanisms like Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and Public Benefit Funds (PBF). It highlights the potential for wind energy to provide up to 20 percent of the U.S. power supply if natural gas prices remain above $4 per thousand cubic feet.

This policy brief summary argues that integrating 'smart growth' land use policies with energy-efficient building practices is essential for reducing U.S. energy consumption and addressing climate change. It proposes a framework focusing on both the location ('where to build') and the design ('how to build') of developments to achieve environmental and economic goals.