Nathaniel Keohane: EDF Voices

The impact of President Biden’s new climate goal

Editor’s note: Since this blog post was published, President Biden has indeed announced his plan to cut climate emissions in half by 2030.

This year, we celebrate Earth Day during a pivotal week for global climate action: President Biden will host a virtual Leaders Summit on Climate this Thursday and Friday. Here’s what we’re looking for.

How ambitious will the U.S. be?

The centerpiece of the summit will be the announcement of the U.S. nationally determined contribution, a new emissions target required for rejoining the Paris Agreement. A growing chorus of environmental organizations and businesses has called for the U.S. to cut climate pollution at least 50% below 2005 levels by 2030.

Such a cut would be on track with President Biden’s commitment to reach net zero emissions by 2050, necessary to reduce the risk of catastrophic climate change. Early press reports suggest that he will announce a number in that range tomorrow.

An EDF report released in March showed that a cut of at least 50% was both ambitious and credible, based on a growing body of evidence. The test of credibility is whether it’s technically and economically achievable with the right mix of policies.

EDF’s report detailed four separate modeling analyses that identified pathways to cutting emissions by 50%, and a number of subsequent reports — including by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the University of Maryland and others — have made the same case using different models.

The nationally determined contribution is the first crucial test of the Biden administration’s climate ambition. While only a target, an ambitious NDC will provide a beacon for future U.S. climate action.

Reducing methane emissions

Emitted from a range of sources including oil and gas operations, landfills and agriculture, methane accounts for a quarter of the warming the world is already experiencing. Because it degrades more quickly in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, reducing methane is the fastest, most powerful way to slow warming in the coming decades — along with the deep reductions needed in carbon dioxide.

In addition to the new NDC, the Biden administration is expected to announce its plan to ramp up international climate finance to support developing countries in reducing emissions and strengthening resilience. Last week, the administration included $2.5 billion for climate finance in its “skinny budget” request to Congress, nearly half of which would be earmarked for the Green Climate Fund. Even that much would leave the U.S. nearly a billion dollars short of the $3 billion pledge that President Obama made back in 2015, while many other major economies have doubled their pledges in the years since.

Sign the “Go Bold, America!” climate action petition Leading again for global impact

Japan, South Korea and Canada — all among the top dozen emitters globally — top the list of countries that the U.S. has been pushing in recent weeks to commit to a cut of 50% or more. Even if they are not ready to take that step by Thursday, a strengthened U.S. NDC will raise pressure on them to act.

This is precisely what the Paris Agreement was designed to do: create a forcing function for countries to set goals, along with a framework for transparent reporting. Since existing NDCs fall well short of meeting the agreement’s objective, more aggressive targets and implementation are needed.

Over the weekend, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry and his Chinese counterpart Xie Zhenhua, meeting in Shanghai, released a joint communique committing both countries to renewed cooperation on climate change — a welcome turnabout from four years of impasse on the issue. A first indication of whether those pledges translate into concrete actions may come when Chinese President Xi Jinping speaks at the Summit on Thursday (his participation being one of the fruits of Kerry’s trip to China).

Next moves for the U.S.

The White House has already paved the way for offshore wind and proposed its historic American Jobs Plan, which would include nearly $1 trillion in climate investments.

This week, the White House is expected to release a new executive order designed to protect our financial system from climate change related threats. Dozens of climate-related bills have been introduced this Congress — including several bipartisan bills — demonstrating growing interest and momentum for climate action in the U.S.

The next ten years will be decisive. Much bolder ambition is needed from the U.S., China, other major emitters and the world as a whole. At this week’s Summit, the White House has a chance to show that America is ready to help lead the way.

jkornegay April 21, 2021 - 03:43

The impact of President Biden’s new climate goal

Editor’s note: Since this blog post was published, President Biden has indeed announced his plan to cut climate emissions in half by 2030.

This year, we celebrate Earth Day during a pivotal week for global climate action: President Biden will host a virtual Leaders Summit on Climate this Thursday and Friday. Here’s what we’re looking for.

How ambitious will the U.S. be?

The centerpiece of the summit will be the announcement of the U.S. nationally determined contribution, a new emissions target required for rejoining the Paris Agreement. A growing chorus of environmental organizations and businesses has called for the U.S. to cut climate pollution at least 50% below 2005 levels by 2030.

Such a cut would be on track with President Biden’s commitment to reach net zero emissions by 2050, necessary to reduce the risk of catastrophic climate change. Early press reports suggest that he will announce a number in that range tomorrow.

An EDF report released in March showed that a cut of at least 50% was both ambitious and credible, based on a growing body of evidence. The test of credibility is whether it’s technically and economically achievable with the right mix of policies.

EDF’s report detailed four separate modeling analyses that identified pathways to cutting emissions by 50%, and a number of subsequent reports — including by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the University of Maryland and others — have made the same case using different models.

The nationally determined contribution is the first crucial test of the Biden administration’s climate ambition. While only a target, an ambitious NDC will provide a beacon for future U.S. climate action.

Reducing methane emissions

Emitted from a range of sources including oil and gas operations, landfills and agriculture, methane accounts for a quarter of the warming the world is already experiencing. Because it degrades more quickly in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, reducing methane is the fastest, most powerful way to slow warming in the coming decades — along with the deep reductions needed in carbon dioxide.

In addition to the new NDC, the Biden administration is expected to announce its plan to ramp up international climate finance to support developing countries in reducing emissions and strengthening resilience. Last week, the administration included $2.5 billion for climate finance in its “skinny budget” request to Congress, nearly half of which would be earmarked for the Green Climate Fund. Even that much would leave the U.S. nearly a billion dollars short of the $3 billion pledge that President Obama made back in 2015, while many other major economies have doubled their pledges in the years since.

Sign the “Go Bold, America!” climate action petition Leading again for global impact

Japan, South Korea and Canada — all among the top dozen emitters globally — top the list of countries that the U.S. has been pushing in recent weeks to commit to a cut of 50% or more. Even if they are not ready to take that step by Thursday, a strengthened U.S. NDC will raise pressure on them to act.

This is precisely what the Paris Agreement was designed to do: create a forcing function for countries to set goals, along with a framework for transparent reporting. Since existing NDCs fall well short of meeting the agreement’s objective, more aggressive targets and implementation are needed.

Over the weekend, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry and his Chinese counterpart Xie Zhenhua, meeting in Shanghai, released a joint communique committing both countries to renewed cooperation on climate change — a welcome turnabout from four years of impasse on the issue. A first indication of whether those pledges translate into concrete actions may come when Chinese President Xi Jinping speaks at the Summit on Thursday (his participation being one of the fruits of Kerry’s trip to China).

Next moves for the U.S.

The White House has already paved the way for offshore wind and proposed its historic American Jobs Plan, which would include nearly $1 trillion in climate investments.

This week, the White House is expected to release a new executive order designed to protect our financial system from climate change related threats. Dozens of climate-related bills have been introduced this Congress — including several bipartisan bills — demonstrating growing interest and momentum for climate action in the U.S.

The next ten years will be decisive. Much bolder ambition is needed from the U.S., China, other major emitters and the world as a whole. At this week’s Summit, the White House has a chance to show that America is ready to help lead the way.

jkornegay April 21, 2021 - 03:43

A new warning bell for Wall Street, as wildfires rage out West

Climate change has forced its way into the headlines in the past week, as record-setting wildfires rage on the U.S. West Coast, burning millions of acres, forcing tens of thousands to evacuate and blanketing the region in smoke that has now reached all the way across the continent. Even as Louisiana was still reeling from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Sally made landfall on the Alabama-Florida border this week, delivering a deluge of "historic" rainfall as it moved onshore. At present, up to 30 inches have already fallen in several areas, with combined surge and rainfall causing flooding across the Eastern Gulf Coast and moving inland.

So it seems particularly timely that a federal advisory committee to the a key U.S. financial regulator released a report last week outlining the impact climate change could have on the country’s financial system. The message to Wall Street and financial regulators is stark: climate change poses serious risks that, if ignored, will undermine the financial system’s ability to support the American economy.

This new report, Managing Climate Risk in the U.S. Financial System, is the first of its kind to be released under the auspices of a U.S. financial regulator. It was written and unanimously approved by 34 experts representing banks, asset managers, agribusiness, the oil and gas sector, academia and environmental organizations. (I was one of the authors.)

What makes the report particularly newsworthy is that it connects the dots between climate change and the risk to the financial system.

Other reports have clearly documented the economic damages from climate change. The science has improved tremendously over the past decade, to the point where we can clearly link severe weather events like hurricanes, wildfires, floods, and drought to a warming planet. Just two weeks ago, for example, Datu published a report commissioned by Environmental Defense Fund that calculated $1.75 trillion in damages from severe weather events since the 1980s. But how do we know those economic damages translate into risk to financial institutions?

The new CFTC report provides the answer.

Climate change is dumping record amounts of rain What’s in the report

One of the most powerful sections of the report describes how financial losses from storms, floods, rising sea level and wildfires can undermine core components of the financial system. For example, climate disasters could cause prolonged disruptions to critical operations of financial market utilities that could "paralyze" the markets they serve. The report cites 2012’s Superstorm Sandy, which flooded a bank vault and damaged or destroyed 1.7 million stock and bond certificates. The company couldn’t even assess the damage for two weeks until pumps could clear the vault of water.

There’s also a sobering list of assets that bear the greatest climate risk, including mortgage-backed securities, REITs, utility debt, insurance equities and bonds. The list of industries at greatest risk reads like a synopsis of the American economy: agriculture, airlines, automobile manufacturers, hospitality, power generation, and concrete and steel. Financial advisors, state pension managers and anyone who actively manages their own retirement portfolio should print Table 3.1 and pin it next to their computer screen.

At the macro — or "systemic" — level, the report discusses how climate impacts could conceivably contribute to a financial crisis by propagating throughout the economy and undermining the value of financial assets, as previously hidden risks are suddenly taken into account.

Perhaps more important, however, is the report’s careful look at what it calls "sub-systemic" shocks. After all, the U.S. is a large and diversified economy, which also makes it resilient. But as the report points out, smaller financial institutions are also at risk: community banks in hurricane-prone areas that hold commercial real estate mortgages, for example, or agricultural credit institutions that would be hard hit by drought.

In other words, this isn’t just about big banks on Wall Street: this is about everyday transactions on Main Street: the home mortgages, commercial real estate loans, farm credit and small business loans that underpin the U.S. economy — and that depend on a stable financial system.

What our economists say about the costs of climate change What we don’t know

How likely are those risks? The scary answer is: We don’t know. The report shows a range of scenarios for how climate change could threaten the U.S. financial system, but we don’t know when or how those scenarios could occur — because we are not requiring businesses and financial institutions to assess, measure, manage and disclose those risks.

New research from the Brookings Institution, aptly titled “Flying Blind,” makes the same point: investors don’t know the actual climate risks to their portfolios. Members of the financial community who ignore climate change — whether they are banks, investors or regulators — do so at their own peril.

That’s precisely why measuring and managing climate risk should be an essential part of the actions regulators take to protect the financial system. The report calls on Congress and regulators to take concrete steps to manage that risk, ranging from a price on carbon to including incorporating climate risk into corporate risk management and taking steps to ensure better data availability and climate risk scenarios.

Two recommendations stand out in particular:

• First, regulators should require companies to more fully and transparently disclose climate risks. EDF was instrumental in getting the Securities and Exchange Commission to publish guidance on climate risk disclosure a decade ago. But as the report makes clear, too many companies are effectively ignoring that guidance. Regulators should beef up those requirements, making it clear that climate risks amount to material risks that firms are required to disclose — and ensure that they comply.
• Second, the report calls on regulators to make clear that managers of retirement and pension plans are entirely right to take climate risk into account alongside "traditional" financial factors. That’s critical, since only a few weeks ago the Trump administration issued a proposed regulation that would prohibit retirement and pension plans from considering climate risk — despite overwhelming opposition from the investment community.

Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that climate change poses risks to human health and the economy. This report is a warning that climate change also threatens the fluid and stable performance of our financial system. As we transition toward a more responsible and sustainable net-zero emission economy, we must also be aware of and manage for the real risks that two centuries of unchecked climate emissions have created.

Register here for a keynote address by Commissioner Rostin Behnam of Commodity Futures Trading Commission during Climate Week NYC 2020. The Commissioner will share key findings from the recent report: Managing Climate Risk in the U.S. Financial System.

tmoran September 18, 2020 - 12:59

A new warning bell for Wall Street, as wildfires rage out West

Climate change has forced its way into the headlines in the past week, as record-setting wildfires rage on the U.S. West Coast, burning millions of acres, forcing tens of thousands to evacuate and blanketing the region in smoke that has now reached all the way across the continent. Even as Louisiana was still reeling from Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Sally made landfall on the Alabama-Florida border this week, delivering a deluge of "historic" rainfall as it moved onshore. At present, up to 30 inches have already fallen in several areas, with combined surge and rainfall causing flooding across the Eastern Gulf Coast and moving inland.

So it seems particularly timely that a federal advisory committee to the a key U.S. financial regulator released a report last week outlining the impact climate change could have on the country’s financial system. The message to Wall Street and financial regulators is stark: climate change poses serious risks that, if ignored, will undermine the financial system’s ability to support the American economy.

This new report, Managing Climate Risk in the U.S. Financial System, is the first of its kind to be released under the auspices of a U.S. financial regulator. It was written and unanimously approved by 34 experts representing banks, asset managers, agribusiness, the oil and gas sector, academia and environmental organizations. (I was one of the authors.)

What makes the report particularly newsworthy is that it connects the dots between climate change and the risk to the financial system.

Other reports have clearly documented the economic damages from climate change. The science has improved tremendously over the past decade, to the point where we can clearly link severe weather events like hurricanes, wildfires, floods, and drought to a warming planet. Just two weeks ago, for example, Datu published a report commissioned by Environmental Defense Fund that calculated $1.75 trillion in damages from severe weather events since the 1980s. But how do we know those economic damages translate into risk to financial institutions?

The new CFTC report provides the answer.

Climate change is dumping record amounts of rain What’s in the report

One of the most powerful sections of the report describes how financial losses from storms, floods, rising sea level and wildfires can undermine core components of the financial system. For example, climate disasters could cause prolonged disruptions to critical operations of financial market utilities that could "paralyze" the markets they serve. The report cites 2012’s Superstorm Sandy, which flooded a bank vault and damaged or destroyed 1.7 million stock and bond certificates. The company couldn’t even assess the damage for two weeks until pumps could clear the vault of water.

There’s also a sobering list of assets that bear the greatest climate risk, including mortgage-backed securities, REITs, utility debt, insurance equities and bonds. The list of industries at greatest risk reads like a synopsis of the American economy: agriculture, airlines, automobile manufacturers, hospitality, power generation, and concrete and steel. Financial advisors, state pension managers and anyone who actively manages their own retirement portfolio should print Table 3.1 and pin it next to their computer screen.

At the macro — or "systemic" — level, the report discusses how climate impacts could conceivably contribute to a financial crisis by propagating throughout the economy and undermining the value of financial assets, as previously hidden risks are suddenly taken into account.

Perhaps more important, however, is the report’s careful look at what it calls "sub-systemic" shocks. After all, the U.S. is a large and diversified economy, which also makes it resilient. But as the report points out, smaller financial institutions are also at risk: community banks in hurricane-prone areas that hold commercial real estate mortgages, for example, or agricultural credit institutions that would be hard hit by drought.

In other words, this isn’t just about big banks on Wall Street: this is about everyday transactions on Main Street: the home mortgages, commercial real estate loans, farm credit and small business loans that underpin the U.S. economy — and that depend on a stable financial system.

What our economists say about the costs of climate change What we don’t know

How likely are those risks? The scary answer is: We don’t know. The report shows a range of scenarios for how climate change could threaten the U.S. financial system, but we don’t know when or how those scenarios could occur — because we are not requiring businesses and financial institutions to assess, measure, manage and disclose those risks.

New research from the Brookings Institution, aptly titled “Flying Blind,” makes the same point: investors don’t know the actual climate risks to their portfolios. Members of the financial community who ignore climate change — whether they are banks, investors or regulators — do so at their own peril.

That’s precisely why measuring and managing climate risk should be an essential part of the actions regulators take to protect the financial system. The report calls on Congress and regulators to take concrete steps to manage that risk, ranging from a price on carbon to including incorporating climate risk into corporate risk management and taking steps to ensure better data availability and climate risk scenarios.

Two recommendations stand out in particular:

• First, regulators should require companies to more fully and transparently disclose climate risks. EDF was instrumental in getting the Securities and Exchange Commission to publish guidance on climate risk disclosure a decade ago. But as the report makes clear, too many companies are effectively ignoring that guidance. Regulators should beef up those requirements, making it clear that climate risks amount to material risks that firms are required to disclose — and ensure that they comply.
• Second, the report calls on regulators to make clear that managers of retirement and pension plans are entirely right to take climate risk into account alongside "traditional" financial factors. That’s critical, since only a few weeks ago the Trump administration issued a proposed regulation that would prohibit retirement and pension plans from considering climate risk — despite overwhelming opposition from the investment community.

Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that climate change poses risks to human health and the economy. This report is a warning that climate change also threatens the fluid and stable performance of our financial system. As we transition toward a more responsible and sustainable net-zero emission economy, we must also be aware of and manage for the real risks that two centuries of unchecked climate emissions have created.

Register here for a keynote address by Commissioner Rostin Behnam of Commodity Futures Trading Commission during Climate Week NYC 2020. The Commissioner will share key findings from the recent report: Managing Climate Risk in the U.S. Financial System.

tmoran September 18, 2020 - 12:59

Climate Week 2020 marks a critical period for climate action

I live and work in Manhattan, so when Climate Week NYC comes around every September, it feels like the climate world is coming to me.

This year, of course, everything is different. New York City – where I've been throughout the whole of the pandemic – is a shadow of its usual self. The barricades won't go up on First Avenue, the traffic won't slow to a halt, and midtown won't be buzzing with diplomats and climate advocates.

And yet, Climate Week 2020 remains a milestone on the calendar. This year, it marks the beginning of a critical 14-month period for climate action. What happens between now and COP26, in November 2021, will help shape the future of multilateralism on climate – and help determine the fate of the planet.

Reinvigorating the Paris Agreement

It was just five years ago that 196 countries reached the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. That landmark agreement created a strong and robust framework for climate action, built around a simple structure: Parties must make commitments to reduce emissions, report transparently and consistently on their progress in meeting them, and come back every five years to make new ones.

While the agreement provides a framework for action, it can't provide the ambition needed to solve the climate crisis. That must come from the Parties themselves.

To date, country commitments – Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – have fallen well short of what's needed to meet the agreement's objective of limiting climate change to well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Now, those of us who were in Paris in 2015 knew that countries would need to ratchet up ambition over time. What we didn't expect was a U.S. administration that would pull the U.S. out of the accord and seek to undermine multilateral cooperation at every turn.

The result is that the world has fallen further behind where we need to be.

Heat-trapping carbon pollution rose in 2019 to a record high. While the deep recession wrought by Covid-19 has led to a temporary dip in emissions, the trend lines continue to point up.

Meanwhile, the devastating impact of climate change is upon us, with wildfires ripping through three million acres in California, exposing millions of residents to toxic air.

What will it take to ratchet up ambition, reinvigorate multilateral cooperation, and begin to realize the promise of Paris?

Rebuild better for the environment and the economy

First, we need to rebuild better from the Covid crisis. Climate and clean energy should be at the center of economic stimulus and recovery efforts, so that as we emerge from the recession we accelerate the shift to a low-carbon future. This is not just good climate policy – it's good economic policy.

Investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and vehicle electrification create good jobs today and buy down the cost of clean energy in future years. A smart tradeoff in good economic times — a no-brainer in an era of high unemployment and rock-bottom interest rates. These investments must be done in a way that promotes equity and justice, by investing in the low-income neighborhoods and communities of color that often face the most direct and dire consequences of climate change. This will redress the toxic burden of pollution that they have been made to disproportionately suffer, and ensure a fair transition for workers in fossil fuel communities.

Watch our discussion on greening the economic stimulus Business can fill the leadership void

Second, we need leadership from the private sector. If there's a silver lining from the Trump administration's abdication of leadership, it's that companies have stepped into the vacuum with bold climate commitments.

In July, nine companies including Microsoft, Nike, and Starbucks announced the Transform to Net Zero initiative. Corporations including Apple, Ford, and McDonald's have also been among this summer's climate leaders.

Private sector initiatives can't replace the need for government policy. But businesses can achieve a great deal by reducing emissions in their own operations and supply chains, investing in climate solutions to reduce emissions elsewhere, and using their political leverage to influence and advocate for climate policy. Ensuring quality and environmental integrity will be critical.

That's why EDF is leading an effort to develop a set of recommendations to maximize the benefits of voluntary market investments towards climate goals, while driving funds to emissions reduction projects. Reducing tropical deforestation should be a top priority: the world can't achieve the Paris temperature targets without protecting our forests, and the tools are now in place for companies to pay for high-quality emissions reductions at scale.

The largest emitters must stand up

Third, and perhaps most importantly, we need real leadership from the world's largest emitters. Europe is leading the way, as it long has, with the EU Green Deal. China is on track to jumpstart the first trade of the world's largest carbon market this year and is expected to announce a new NDC in the coming months, according to the government's plan;

A critical need for leadership from the U.S.

The U.S. not only should rejoin the Paris Agreement, but rejoin it in a way that restores American credibility, projects American leadership and boosts global ambition.

That will require an aggressive 2030 target backed up by a comprehensive national climate policy. That policy agenda must include a massive investment in clean energy, next-generation Clean Air Act standards that go well beyond the regulations of the Obama administration, and an enforceable declining limit on carbon pollution that puts the entire economy on a path to net zero emissions and aligns market incentives with the low-carbon transition.

Climate Week 2020 should be a wake-up call, at a time when multiple immediate crises – Covid-19, economic recession, and systemic racism and injustice – threaten to crowd the climate crisis off the world's agenda. With the right leadership and commitments, the next 14 months can put us back on a path to bold climate solutions.

Learn more about EDF at Climate Week 2020 tmoran September 11, 2020 - 03:40

Climate Week 2020 marks a critical period for climate action

I live and work in Manhattan, so when Climate Week NYC comes around every September, it feels like the climate world is coming to me.

This year, of course, everything is different. New York City – where I've been throughout the whole of the pandemic – is a shadow of its usual self. The barricades won't go up on First Avenue, the traffic won't slow to a halt, and midtown won't be buzzing with diplomats and climate advocates.

And yet, Climate Week 2020 remains a milestone on the calendar. This year, it marks the beginning of a critical 14-month period for climate action. What happens between now and COP26, in November 2021, will help shape the future of multilateralism on climate – and help determine the fate of the planet.

Reinvigorating the Paris Agreement

It was just five years ago that 196 countries reached the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. That landmark agreement created a strong and robust framework for climate action, built around a simple structure: Parties must make commitments to reduce emissions, report transparently and consistently on their progress in meeting them, and come back every five years to make new ones.

While the agreement provides a framework for action, it can't provide the ambition needed to solve the climate crisis. That must come from the Parties themselves.

To date, country commitments – Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – have fallen well short of what's needed to meet the agreement's objective of limiting climate change to well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Now, those of us who were in Paris in 2015 knew that countries would need to ratchet up ambition over time. What we didn't expect was a U.S. administration that would pull the U.S. out of the accord and seek to undermine multilateral cooperation at every turn.

The result is that the world has fallen further behind where we need to be.

Heat-trapping carbon pollution rose in 2019 to a record high. While the deep recession wrought by Covid-19 has led to a temporary dip in emissions, the trend lines continue to point up.

Meanwhile, the devastating impact of climate change is upon us, with wildfires ripping through three million acres in California, exposing millions of residents to toxic air.

What will it take to ratchet up ambition, reinvigorate multilateral cooperation, and begin to realize the promise of Paris?

Rebuild better for the environment and the economy

First, we need to rebuild better from the Covid crisis. Climate and clean energy should be at the center of economic stimulus and recovery efforts, so that as we emerge from the recession we accelerate the shift to a low-carbon future. This is not just good climate policy – it's good economic policy.

Investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and vehicle electrification create good jobs today and buy down the cost of clean energy in future years. A smart tradeoff in good economic times — a no-brainer in an era of high unemployment and rock-bottom interest rates. These investments must be done in a way that promotes equity and justice, by investing in the low-income neighborhoods and communities of color that often face the most direct and dire consequences of climate change. This will redress the toxic burden of pollution that they have been made to disproportionately suffer, and ensure a fair transition for workers in fossil fuel communities.

Watch our discussion on greening the economic stimulus Business can fill the leadership void

Second, we need leadership from the private sector. If there's a silver lining from the Trump administration's abdication of leadership, it's that companies have stepped into the vacuum with bold climate commitments.

In July, nine companies including Microsoft, Nike, and Starbucks announced the Transform to Net Zero initiative. Corporations including Apple, Ford, and McDonald's have also been among this summer's climate leaders.

Private sector initiatives can't replace the need for government policy. But businesses can achieve a great deal by reducing emissions in their own operations and supply chains, investing in climate solutions to reduce emissions elsewhere, and using their political leverage to influence and advocate for climate policy. Ensuring quality and environmental integrity will be critical.

That's why EDF is leading an effort to develop a set of recommendations to maximize the benefits of voluntary market investments towards climate goals, while driving funds to emissions reduction projects. Reducing tropical deforestation should be a top priority: the world can't achieve the Paris temperature targets without protecting our forests, and the tools are now in place for companies to pay for high-quality emissions reductions at scale.

The largest emitters must stand up

Third, and perhaps most importantly, we need real leadership from the world's largest emitters. Europe is leading the way, as it long has, with the EU Green Deal. China is on track to jumpstart the first trade of the world's largest carbon market this year and is expected to announce a new NDC in the coming months, according to the government's plan;

A critical need for leadership from the U.S.

The U.S. not only should rejoin the Paris Agreement, but rejoin it in a way that restores American credibility, projects American leadership and boosts global ambition.

That will require an aggressive 2030 target backed up by a comprehensive national climate policy. That policy agenda must include a massive investment in clean energy, next-generation Clean Air Act standards that go well beyond the regulations of the Obama administration, and an enforceable declining limit on carbon pollution that puts the entire economy on a path to net zero emissions and aligns market incentives with the low-carbon transition.

Climate Week 2020 should be a wake-up call, at a time when multiple immediate crises – Covid-19, economic recession, and systemic racism and injustice – threaten to crowd the climate crisis off the world's agenda. With the right leadership and commitments, the next 14 months can put us back on a path to bold climate solutions.

Learn more about EDF at Climate Week 2020 tmoran September 11, 2020 - 03:40

You’re not imagining this – politicians in Washington are actually talking climate again

Editor's note: This post was updated on Aug. 6, 2019

I've been working on climate change for a long time, but I've never seen a moment like the one we're in now.

The surge in political energy across the country and on Capitol Hill, coupled with the leaps and bounds made in cleaner technology, gives me hope that, even with the daily reminders of the obstacles we face, we can solve this challenge. Here's why. 

• As the 2020 presidential campaign shifts into high gear, the climate crisis is receiving much more attention than it has in the past.  Nearly every candidate has released their own plan to address this crisis, and climate change has been brought up by moderators at every primary debate. Beginning in September, Democratic candidates will start participating in specific climate change forums — another sign that climate change is a top-tier issues from voters in early primary states and across the country.
• In the House, Rep. Donald McEachin will introduce legislation in September that puts our country on the path to a 100% clean economy by 2050. This bold plan is supported by a large and diverse coalition, and the push for 100% Clean is now a top priority for House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone.
• Climate is also front and center in other forums on Capitol Hill. In the House, Rep. Kathy Castor is chairing the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, bringing together a diverse group of leaders to highlight the growing threat of the climate crisis and identify real climate solutions, even holding hearings outside of Washington, DC.  Across the Capitol, Sen. Brian Schatz is chairing the Senate Democrats' Special Committee on the Climate Crisis.
• In addition to these committees, there have been a series of climate-related hearings since the new Congress took over in early January. There are also signs of a more constructive stance among some House Republicans, who have responded to those committee hearings by engaging on the substance and inviting serious witnesses to testify.
• Florida Republican Francis Rooney is even sponsoring a bipartisan carbon tax bill, one of a series of carbon tax bills that have been introduced over the summer.
• The Republican-controlled Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held its first hearing on climate change since 2012 where its leader, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, said that global warming is "directly impacting" the lives of her constituents. Other Senate Republicans are joining the debate about solutions to climate change.
• And, of course, the proposed Green New Deal has given climate issues new visibility on the Hill. While we don't agree with everything in the Green New Deal resolution, its backers are bringing new ideas and needed ambition to the conversation.

It's clear that politicians are responding to pressure from home.

A spring poll by our partner organization EDF Action and other allies found an astonishing result: Climate change is cited as a top tier issue by more Democratic primary voters than any other issue in three of the five early primary states surveyed — California, New Hampshire and Iowa — and it places second in another, Nevada.

Nationally, a poll by Yale and George Mason universities indicates that the number of Americans who are "alarmed" about climate change is at an all-time high, 29%. This is "double that segment's size in 2013 and an eight-point increase since March 2018," the poll found. Overall, 59% of Americans are either alarmed or "concerned."

What's the cause? The foundation was laid over many years by the tireless work of activists and climate scientists.

But more immediately, I think it's a combination of anger at the backward policies of this White House, of recent reports on climate impacts from the U.S. government and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, of the bold ambition of a new wave of young activists led by groups like the Sunrise Movement, and of vivid images of impacts like the California wildfires and violent East Coast hurricanes.

EDF Action: Tell Congress to do more on climate

To succeed, we must find solutions that address the scale of the challenge, while being politically sustainable over the long term. That is why the push for a 100% clean economy is quickly gaining momentum.

A 100% clean energy economy will inspire development and adoption of the technologies that will get us to net zero, meaning that we are producing no more carbon emissions than we can remove from the atmosphere.

Market forces must move in one direction

As consensus builds for climate action on Capitol Hill, a comprehensive policy package should center on putting enforceable limits on climate pollution and requiring companies to pay when they pollute. When companies must face the true costs of their pollution, and profit more from clean energy than from fossil fuels, we will spur a race to build a prosperous low-carbon economy.

What's more, everything else we need to do to meet the climate challenge, such as increasing energy efficiency in buildings and improving fuel economy in cars, will have even greater impact —because market forces will be pushing in the same direction as climate progress instead of against it.

We also need to invest in new ways to remove climate pollution from the atmosphere, whether through farm and forest practices that absorb more carbon, or stepped-up research and development into direct air capture technologies. It's going to take all the tools we have to meet this challenge.

With President Trump in the White House and signs of climate impacts all around us, we can't afford casual optimism. But the surge in political momentum gives me new hope that we can win this fight.

Tell Congress: It’s time to go 100% clean krives March 14, 2019 - 03:53

See comments

No more drilling in the arctic, no selling off National Parks, no dumping coal ash in water, plant more trees, spray less poison on crops, no more trophy hunting, no importing endangered species alive or dead, better fuel efficiency, more charging stations for electric cars, pave roads wit recycled plastic, build home with hemp bricks, really recycle here in America. There are so many things we can do easily to have an impact. If we just skip the beef two days a week and buy bars of soap wrapped in paper opposed to more single use plastic. Bring your own bag to the store and your cup to Starbucks. Everyone doing a little helps a lot

Holly Dain March 21, 2019 at 2:06 am

There are two aspects of climate change that I never hear EDF or other environmental groups speak about: our consumer driven culture and reverence for the Earth. The more we consume the more carbon in the atmosphere; and the more depletion of natural resources, trash and plastic. And if we don’t feel connected to the Earth on a deep level then all the electric cars and solar panels in the world won’t heal the damage we’ve done. We can’t solve a problem with the same mentality that created it in the first place.

Karen Neary March 21, 2019 at 4:48 pm

In a report such as this, shouldn't you mention the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act that was recently introduced in the House?

This act does literally put a price on carbon. I am quite surprised by your omission.

Steven Marantz March 24, 2019 at 11:51 am

These people obviously do not watch the current weather conditions in America. First, it is May and snow in the mountains in San Diego, CA. and else where in California, Colorado, and other States. If you're in snow, then where's the climate heat changing in America? Get your facts right about climate heat changing in America. Forest fires are caused by bad electric poles breaking down and not from climate chaining.

CHARLES MOST May 28, 2019 at 12:26 pm

Charles, scientists who study this continue to tell us that a regional cold spell doesn’t negate the overwhelming evidence showing that climate change is happening. We need to look to science for facts — and science must guide how we tackle this mounting crisis.This article sheds more light on the connection between cold weather and climate change:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/01/climate-change-colder-winters-global-warming-polar-vortex/

 

Karin Rives May 30, 2019 at 10:18 am

You’re not imagining this – politicians in Washington are actually talking climate again

Editor's note: This post was updated on Aug. 6, 2019

I've been working on climate change for a long time, but I've never seen a moment like the one we're in now.

The surge in political energy across the country and on Capitol Hill, coupled with the leaps and bounds made in cleaner technology, gives me hope that, even with the daily reminders of the obstacles we face, we can solve this challenge. Here's why. 

• As the 2020 presidential campaign shifts into high gear, the climate crisis is receiving much more attention than it has in the past.  Nearly every candidate has released their own plan to address this crisis, and climate change has been brought up by moderators at every primary debate. Beginning in September, Democratic candidates will start participating in specific climate change forums — another sign that climate change is a top-tier issues from voters in early primary states and across the country.
• In the House, Rep. Donald McEachin will introduce legislation in September that puts our country on the path to a 100% clean economy by 2050. This bold plan is supported by a large and diverse coalition, and the push for 100% Clean is now a top priority for House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone.
• Climate is also front and center in other forums on Capitol Hill. In the House, Rep. Kathy Castor is chairing the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, bringing together a diverse group of leaders to highlight the growing threat of the climate crisis and identify real climate solutions, even holding hearings outside of Washington, DC.  Across the Capitol, Sen. Brian Schatz is chairing the Senate Democrats' Special Committee on the Climate Crisis.
• In addition to these committees, there have been a series of climate-related hearings since the new Congress took over in early January. There are also signs of a more constructive stance among some House Republicans, who have responded to those committee hearings by engaging on the substance and inviting serious witnesses to testify.
• Florida Republican Francis Rooney is even sponsoring a bipartisan carbon tax bill, one of a series of carbon tax bills that have been introduced over the summer.
• The Republican-controlled Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held its first hearing on climate change since 2012 where its leader, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, said that global warming is "directly impacting" the lives of her constituents. Other Senate Republicans are joining the debate about solutions to climate change.
• And, of course, the proposed Green New Deal has given climate issues new visibility on the Hill. While we don't agree with everything in the Green New Deal resolution, its backers are bringing new ideas and needed ambition to the conversation.

It's clear that politicians are responding to pressure from home.

A spring poll by our partner organization EDF Action and other allies found an astonishing result: Climate change is cited as a top tier issue by more Democratic primary voters than any other issue in three of the five early primary states surveyed — California, New Hampshire and Iowa — and it places second in another, Nevada.

Nationally, a poll by Yale and George Mason universities indicates that the number of Americans who are "alarmed" about climate change is at an all-time high, 29%. This is "double that segment's size in 2013 and an eight-point increase since March 2018," the poll found. Overall, 59% of Americans are either alarmed or "concerned."

What's the cause? The foundation was laid over many years by the tireless work of activists and climate scientists.

But more immediately, I think it's a combination of anger at the backward policies of this White House, of recent reports on climate impacts from the U.S. government and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, of the bold ambition of a new wave of young activists led by groups like the Sunrise Movement, and of vivid images of impacts like the California wildfires and violent East Coast hurricanes.

EDF Action: Tell Congress to do more on climate

To succeed, we must find solutions that address the scale of the challenge, while being politically sustainable over the long term. That is why the push for a 100% clean economy is quickly gaining momentum.

A 100% clean energy economy will inspire development and adoption of the technologies that will get us to net zero, meaning that we are producing no more carbon emissions than we can remove from the atmosphere.

Market forces must move in one direction

As consensus builds for climate action on Capitol Hill, a comprehensive policy package should center on putting enforceable limits on climate pollution and requiring companies to pay when they pollute. When companies must face the true costs of their pollution, and profit more from clean energy than from fossil fuels, we will spur a race to build a prosperous low-carbon economy.

What's more, everything else we need to do to meet the climate challenge, such as increasing energy efficiency in buildings and improving fuel economy in cars, will have even greater impact —because market forces will be pushing in the same direction as climate progress instead of against it.

We also need to invest in new ways to remove climate pollution from the atmosphere, whether through farm and forest practices that absorb more carbon, or stepped-up research and development into direct air capture technologies. It's going to take all the tools we have to meet this challenge.

With President Trump in the White House and signs of climate impacts all around us, we can't afford casual optimism. But the surge in political momentum gives me new hope that we can win this fight.

Tell Congress: It’s time to go 100% clean krives March 14, 2019 - 03:53

See comments

No more drilling in the arctic, no selling off National Parks, no dumping coal ash in water, plant more trees, spray less poison on crops, no more trophy hunting, no importing endangered species alive or dead, better fuel efficiency, more charging stations for electric cars, pave roads wit recycled plastic, build home with hemp bricks, really recycle here in America. There are so many things we can do easily to have an impact. If we just skip the beef two days a week and buy bars of soap wrapped in paper opposed to more single use plastic. Bring your own bag to the store and your cup to Starbucks. Everyone doing a little helps a lot

Holly Dain March 21, 2019 at 2:06 am

There are two aspects of climate change that I never hear EDF or other environmental groups speak about: our consumer driven culture and reverence for the Earth. The more we consume the more carbon in the atmosphere; and the more depletion of natural resources, trash and plastic. And if we don’t feel connected to the Earth on a deep level then all the electric cars and solar panels in the world won’t heal the damage we’ve done. We can’t solve a problem with the same mentality that created it in the first place.

Karen Neary March 21, 2019 at 4:48 pm

In a report such as this, shouldn't you mention the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act that was recently introduced in the House?

This act does literally put a price on carbon. I am quite surprised by your omission.

Steven Marantz March 24, 2019 at 11:51 am

These people obviously do not watch the current weather conditions in America. First, it is May and snow in the mountains in San Diego, CA. and else where in California, Colorado, and other States. If you're in snow, then where's the climate heat changing in America? Get your facts right about climate heat changing in America. Forest fires are caused by bad electric poles breaking down and not from climate chaining.

CHARLES MOST May 28, 2019 at 12:26 pm

Charles, scientists who study this continue to tell us that a regional cold spell doesn’t negate the overwhelming evidence showing that climate change is happening. We need to look to science for facts — and science must guide how we tackle this mounting crisis.This article sheds more light on the connection between cold weather and climate change:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/01/climate-change-colder-winters-global-warming-polar-vortex/

 

Karin Rives May 30, 2019 at 10:18 am

Carbon removal technologies to help tackle climate change? Here’s what it’ll take.

This is a summary of an essay published in Foreign Affairs.

A wave of destructive hurricanes, heat spells and wildfires has ravaged communities across the United States over the past year – bringing new urgency to the need for climate action, as both scientists and citizens are able to connect these extreme events to a warming Earth.

Time is of the essence, but it's not too late to solve the global climate crisis. A decade of extraordinary innovation has made a greening of the global economy not just feasible, but likely. Now a whole new arsenal is emerging in the fight against climate change: negative emission technologies.

Alongside aggressive action to cut emissions, these technologies will be crucial to reaching "net zero" carbon emissions – the point where any climate pollution we add to the atmosphere is balanced by what we take out. The U.S. must reach this goal by 2050, with the world as a whole reaching net zero as soon as possible thereafter, if we are to stabilize our atmosphere.

$1 billion – just to research it

NETs are different from conventional approaches to climate mitigation because rather than seeking to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases we've emitted into the atmosphere, they focus on removing carbon dioxide that's already there. 

Sign up for updates on innovations that help reach net zero emissions:

Thank you for subscribing to the Climate Tech Brief.

Some NETs are ready to be deployed today, including land management practices that store more carbon in agricultural soils and forests. Others are at the pilot stage – like direct air carbon capture machines that suck carbon out of the sky and store it underground. And then there are some on the horizon, such as technologies that mimic natural rock weathering practices on a vastly accelerated time scale.

A key challenge is getting to scale. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recently estimated that to meet its climate targets, the world will need to remove as much as 10 gigatons of CO2 from the atmosphere each year by mid-century – nearly twice the current annual emissions in the U.S. from burning fossil fuels.

The report recommends as much as $1 billion annually in U.S. government funding for research on NETs.

Airlines could pave the way for NETs

We've long known that pricing emissions through a carbon tax or an emissions trading system creates an economic incentive for cheaper, faster ways to cut pollution. Valuing negative emissions – through tax rebates or tradeable credits for removal – would spur countless more entrepreneurs to join the hunt for NETs.

Standing in the way of those incentives is the lack of a global market for carbon credits. But progress on that front is coming from an unlikely place: aviation.

Airlines, which account for about 2 percent of global carbon emissions today and are set to triple or quadruple such pollution by mid-century, have agreed to cap the CO2 emissions from international flights at 2020 levels with the help of a global carbon credit program.

A pot of gold will await companies that cut or remove aviation carbon emissions.

Done right, this program – the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, or "CORSIA" – could catalyze a global carbon market that drives investment in low-carbon fuels and technologies such as NETs.

Over the first 15 years of CORSIA, demand for aviation credits is estimated to reach between 2.5 billion and 3 billion tons – roughly equal to the greenhouse gas emissions the U.S. power and manufacturing sectors release annually.

With this new demand, there is a good possibility that a pot of gold will await companies that develop technologies to cut or remove aviation carbon emissions. CORSIA could also spur investment in NETs to make cleaner jet fuel, for example by producing fuel from waste or biomass through processes that, on balance, absorb more carbon than they emit.

Carbon removal must be part of Plan A

Scientists and activists have historically tended to regard negative emission technologies as a fallback option, to be held in reserve in case other efforts fail. Many fear that jumping ahead and spending billions to suck carbon from the sky or to develop massive forest carbon sinks will distract from the critical need to cut pollution.

But the world no longer has the luxury of waiting for emission reduction strategies to do the job alone. Far from being a Plan B, NETs must be a critical part of Plan A, and embracing them sooner rather than later makes economic sense.

Because the marginal costs of emission reductions rise as more emissions are cut, it will be cheaper to deploy NETs at the same time as emission reduction technologies rather than waiting to exhaust those options first.

Many NETs are ready to be deployed at scale today, and they could help make the difference between limiting warming to bearable levels, and failing to do so. Thanks to the emerging global carbon market for aviation, we may soon be on our way.

Get innovation updates

We'll send regular updates about developments in technology, science and the environment.

Thank you for subscribing to the Climate Tech Brief.

krives February 12, 2019 - 10:29

See comments

Politicians and business leadership ignore global warming at the peril of all people.

Stephen a Johnson February 12, 2019 at 6:24 pm

Reforestation and new agricultural practices could also trap carbon and help slow warming. But direct removal will still be necessary. With direct-air capture, the most obvious option is to store carbon underground. But technologies that create a sellable product will help reduce costs.

Three of the biggest direct-air carbon removal companies – Carbon Engineering, Climeworks, and Global Thermostat – are all working to store CO2 in something useable. Carbon Engineering markets a carbon-neutral fuel. Climeworks sends carbon to fertilizers, fuels and soon, the beverage industry. Global Thermostat sells the gas for a wide range of purposes.

Products made with carbon don’t demand a high enough price boost capture around the world, so expanding them will require government intervention. 

James Gimbel February 14, 2019 at 2:07 am

I suggest a yearly week or two weeks off for airlines. Many people need a second and a third look to see how important a blue sky is. We are convinced we have to have so many energy sources, yet people have lived fine for thousands of years without. Cell phones are an example, & they could be used for emergencies only. Car engines could be designed to meet the speed limit which is not related to 500 break horse power! Then there is lung cancer which makes me wonder.

Robert Jones July 19, 2019 at 3:08 pm

Carbon removal technologies to help tackle climate change? Here’s what it’ll take.

This is a summary of an essay published in Foreign Affairs.

A wave of destructive hurricanes, heat spells and wildfires has ravaged communities across the United States over the past year – bringing new urgency to the need for climate action, as both scientists and citizens are able to connect these extreme events to a warming Earth.

Time is of the essence, but it's not too late to solve the global climate crisis. A decade of extraordinary innovation has made a greening of the global economy not just feasible, but likely. Now a whole new arsenal is emerging in the fight against climate change: negative emission technologies.

Alongside aggressive action to cut emissions, these technologies will be crucial to reaching "net zero" carbon emissions – the point where any climate pollution we add to the atmosphere is balanced by what we take out. The U.S. must reach this goal by 2050, with the world as a whole reaching net zero as soon as possible thereafter, if we are to stabilize our atmosphere.

$1 billion – just to research it

NETs are different from conventional approaches to climate mitigation because rather than seeking to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases we've emitted into the atmosphere, they focus on removing carbon dioxide that's already there. 

Sign up for updates on innovations that help reach net zero emissions:

Thank you for subscribing to the Climate Tech Brief.

Some NETs are ready to be deployed today, including land management practices that store more carbon in agricultural soils and forests. Others are at the pilot stage – like direct air carbon capture machines that suck carbon out of the sky and store it underground. And then there are some on the horizon, such as technologies that mimic natural rock weathering practices on a vastly accelerated time scale.

A key challenge is getting to scale. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recently estimated that to meet its climate targets, the world will need to remove as much as 10 gigatons of CO2 from the atmosphere each year by mid-century – nearly twice the current annual emissions in the U.S. from burning fossil fuels.

The report recommends as much as $1 billion annually in U.S. government funding for research on NETs.

Airlines could pave the way for NETs

We've long known that pricing emissions through a carbon tax or an emissions trading system creates an economic incentive for cheaper, faster ways to cut pollution. Valuing negative emissions – through tax rebates or tradeable credits for removal – would spur countless more entrepreneurs to join the hunt for NETs.

Standing in the way of those incentives is the lack of a global market for carbon credits. But progress on that front is coming from an unlikely place: aviation.

Airlines, which account for about 2 percent of global carbon emissions today and are set to triple or quadruple such pollution by mid-century, have agreed to cap the CO2 emissions from international flights at 2020 levels with the help of a global carbon credit program.

A pot of gold will await companies that cut or remove aviation carbon emissions.

Done right, this program – the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, or "CORSIA" – could catalyze a global carbon market that drives investment in low-carbon fuels and technologies such as NETs.

Over the first 15 years of CORSIA, demand for aviation credits is estimated to reach between 2.5 billion and 3 billion tons – roughly equal to the greenhouse gas emissions the U.S. power and manufacturing sectors release annually.

With this new demand, there is a good possibility that a pot of gold will await companies that develop technologies to cut or remove aviation carbon emissions. CORSIA could also spur investment in NETs to make cleaner jet fuel, for example by producing fuel from waste or biomass through processes that, on balance, absorb more carbon than they emit.

Carbon removal must be part of Plan A

Scientists and activists have historically tended to regard negative emission technologies as a fallback option, to be held in reserve in case other efforts fail. Many fear that jumping ahead and spending billions to suck carbon from the sky or to develop massive forest carbon sinks will distract from the critical need to cut pollution.

But the world no longer has the luxury of waiting for emission reduction strategies to do the job alone. Far from being a Plan B, NETs must be a critical part of Plan A, and embracing them sooner rather than later makes economic sense.

Because the marginal costs of emission reductions rise as more emissions are cut, it will be cheaper to deploy NETs at the same time as emission reduction technologies rather than waiting to exhaust those options first.

Many NETs are ready to be deployed at scale today, and they could help make the difference between limiting warming to bearable levels, and failing to do so. Thanks to the emerging global carbon market for aviation, we may soon be on our way.

Get innovation updates

We'll send regular updates about developments in technology, science and the environment.

Thank you for subscribing to the Climate Tech Brief.

krives February 12, 2019 - 10:29

See comments

Politicians and business leadership ignore global warming at the peril of all people.

Stephen a Johnson February 12, 2019 at 6:24 pm

Reforestation and new agricultural practices could also trap carbon and help slow warming. But direct removal will still be necessary. With direct-air capture, the most obvious option is to store carbon underground. But technologies that create a sellable product will help reduce costs.

Three of the biggest direct-air carbon removal companies – Carbon Engineering, Climeworks, and Global Thermostat – are all working to store CO2 in something useable. Carbon Engineering markets a carbon-neutral fuel. Climeworks sends carbon to fertilizers, fuels and soon, the beverage industry. Global Thermostat sells the gas for a wide range of purposes.

Products made with carbon don’t demand a high enough price boost capture around the world, so expanding them will require government intervention. 

James Gimbel February 14, 2019 at 2:07 am

I suggest a yearly week or two weeks off for airlines. Many people need a second and a third look to see how important a blue sky is. We are convinced we have to have so many energy sources, yet people have lived fine for thousands of years without. Cell phones are an example, & they could be used for emergencies only. Car engines could be designed to meet the speed limit which is not related to 500 break horse power! Then there is lung cancer which makes me wonder.

Robert Jones July 19, 2019 at 3:08 pm

7 signs the global energy economy is in transition

As negotiators from 197 nations are meeting here in Poland this week to discuss ways to stop runaway climate change – amid reports about rapidly rising emissions – there are also significant market and technology trends bringing positive news.

These trends, combined with the actions of responsible governments, can point us in a better direction. Of course, whether we ultimately succeed in dealing with climate change will depend on the action of political leaders, investors, engineers, voters and activists.

Here are the key trends you’ll want to keep an eye on.

1. U.S. coal continues to decline

United States coal consumption is at a  39-year low and this trajectory continues despite the Trump administration’s efforts to promote coal.

2. China’s emissions will peak ahead of goal

The world’s largest emitter of climate pollution, China is likely to reach peak carbon dioxide emissions at least 5 years ahead of its commitment under the 2016 Paris Agreement.

3. Clean energy is outcompeting fossil fuels

Building new renewable energy is now cheaper than running existing coal-fired power plants in many U.S. states. Taking advantage of those trends, utility giant Xcel announced it will cut its carbon pollution 80 percent by 2030 and 100 percent by 2050 across its service territory in eight Western and Midwestern states.

4. Battery storage a game changer

Duke Energy, the second largest utility in the US, will alone invest $500 million in battery storage over the next 15 years, which could help maximize our use of renewable energy on the grid. And solar energy systems with new efficient batteries in Arizona and other states will soon be able to provide electricity at a lower per megawatt-hour cost than new combined cycle natural gas-fired generation.

5. Developing nations drive renewables

Seventy percent of all new electricity generating capacity worldwide in 2017 was renewable, including in developing countries. If these trends continue, renewables will produce half of all electricity by 2030.

6. Energy companies move on methane

Thirteen oil and gas companies – comprising 30 percent of global production – committed to reducing methane emissions, which are driving 25 percent of current warming.

7. Companies like Walmart are taking action

The world’s largest retailer has committed to cutting a gigaton of climate pollution from its global supply chain by 2020. That’s more emissions than the entire German economy produces annually.

We know that global carbon emissions rose in 2017 and are projected to hit record levels this year. By halting this trajectory we can build a better future for the world while taking advantage of the positive market changes already under way.

Get innovation updates

We’ll send regular updates about developments in technology, science and the environment.

Thank you for subscribing to the Climate Tech Brief.

krives December 12, 2018 - 02:12

7 signs the global energy economy is in transition

As negotiators from 197 nations are meeting here in Poland this week to discuss ways to stop runaway climate change – amid reports about rapidly rising emissions – there are also significant market and technology trends bringing positive news.

These trends, combined with the actions of responsible governments, can point us in a better direction. Of course, whether we ultimately succeed in dealing with climate change will depend on the action of political leaders, investors, engineers, voters and activists.

Here are the key trends you’ll want to keep an eye on.

1. U.S. coal continues to decline

United States coal consumption is at a  39-year low and this trajectory continues despite the Trump administration’s efforts to promote coal.

2. China’s emissions will peak ahead of goal

The world’s largest emitter of climate pollution, China is likely to reach peak carbon dioxide emissions at least 5 years ahead of its commitment under the 2016 Paris Agreement.

3. Clean energy is outcompeting fossil fuels

Building new renewable energy is now cheaper than running existing coal-fired power plants in many U.S. states. Taking advantage of those trends, utility giant Xcel announced it will cut its carbon pollution 80 percent by 2030 and 100 percent by 2050 across its service territory in eight Western and Midwestern states.

4. Battery storage a game changer

Duke Energy, the second largest utility in the US, will alone invest $500 million in battery storage over the next 15 years, which could help maximize our use of renewable energy on the grid. And solar energy systems with new efficient batteries in Arizona and other states will soon be able to provide electricity at a lower per megawatt-hour cost than new combined cycle natural gas-fired generation.

5. Developing nations drive renewables

Seventy percent of all new electricity generating capacity worldwide in 2017 was renewable, including in developing countries. If these trends continue, renewables will produce half of all electricity by 2030.

6. Energy companies move on methane

Thirteen oil and gas companies – comprising 30 percent of global production – committed to reducing methane emissions, which are driving 25 percent of current warming.

7. Companies like Walmart are taking action

The world’s largest retailer has committed to cutting a gigaton of climate pollution from its global supply chain by 2020. That’s more emissions than the entire German economy produces annually.

We know that global carbon emissions rose in 2017 and are projected to hit record levels this year. By halting this trajectory we can build a better future for the world while taking advantage of the positive market changes already under way.

Get innovation updates

We’ll send regular updates about developments in technology, science and the environment.

Thank you for subscribing to the Climate Tech Brief.

krives December 12, 2018 - 02:12

Cutting carbon pollution from aviation: A major breakthrough years in the making

Five years ago, I had one of the hardest tasks in government for someone who cares about climate action: running an interagency process in the White House on addressing carbon dioxide emissions from international aviation.

To put it mildly, climate action in the aviation sector was at an impasse.

The European Union was seeking to extend its greenhouse gas emission trading system to include international flights to and from Europe. The EU was well within its legal rights, and a range of studies showed that despite significant emission reductions the costs to passengers would be slight.

But the political opposition was widespread and fierce.

India had gone ballistic at the idea. Russia threatened to deny Europe access to its airspace. China said it would cancel orders for European aircraft. 

In the United States, meanwhile, not a single senator was willing to block legislation that railed against Europe’s proposal to cover American air carriers.

And yet, last week, the 191 member states of the International Civil Aviation Organization agreed to the first-ever cap on carbon pollution from a global sector, adopting by broad acclaim a market-based measure on carbon dioxide emissions from international flights.

The agreement, while not perfect, is significant – not only for the emissions reductions it promises to achieve, but also because of the circuitous journey that got us here.

3 signs we’re entering a golden age for carbon markets

The impetus to find a way out of the impasse came from two quarters.

The first was a business imperative. What the aviation industry feared more than anything was a patchwork of regulations – one approach in Europe, another in the U.S. and still another in China. That made the industry, a strong opponent of the EU’s plan, willing to come to the table to get a global deal.

The second was the Obama administration’s commitment to climate action. If we couldn’t overcome the widespread opposition to Europe moving ahead, could we leverage the threat of EU action to land an international agreement?

ICAO, the aviation agency of the United Nations, had already agreed in 2010 to explore policy options to achieve a global solution. So in the fall of 2011, I raised the idea of pivoting to ICAO in a conversation with Mike Froman, then the White House Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs.

A breakthrough came the following spring, when Tony Tyler, head of the International Air Transport Association, met with Mike and made it clear that the industry would support a robust market-based measure in ICAO.

EU: Get a deal or else

That summer, U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern held the first of a series of informal meetings among countries to discuss an ICAO solution.

Meanwhile, the administration worked to ensure that when the anti-E.U. legislation was passed by Congress that autumn, it directed the administration to negotiate a global approach.

Work on a global market-based approach accelerated once ICAO agreed in 2013 to develop a proposal for formal consideration.

The EU kept the pressure on by making clear that it would reinstate its coverage of international flights if ICAO failed to act.

The industry remained supportive, just as Tony Tyler had pledged back in 2012. Environmental Defense Fund and our partners in the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which EDF helped to found 20 years ago, published economic and legal analyses and provided technical support to governments, including through expert participation in ICAO working groups.

My former colleagues in the Obama administration spearheaded the effort to reach an agreement and put on a full-court diplomatic press in the last few weeks to secure participation from as many countries as possible.

Nations: We’ll move if we can compromise

The global market-based measure announced in Montreal last week will reduce carbon pollution by an estimated 2.5 billion tons over the first fifteen years of the program. It signals continued momentum on climate action, and positions the aviation sector as an engine of demand for high-quality emissions reductions around the world.

Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is a luxury the world cannot afford.

To be sure, the agreement is not perfect. An ideal agreement would apply to all anticipated emissions growth, whereas the deal currently covers 76 percent – although that will rise if more nations join.

The “carbon-neutral growth” target must be strengthened over time if the aviation sector is to do its fair share to address climate change – which is why the agreement includes provisions for regular review in light of the Paris Agreement’s long-term temperature goals.

To accommodate the concerns of fast-growing emerging markets, the agreement initially ties each air carrier’s responsibility to the sector’s overall emissions growth, not just its own emissions – arguably a more equitable approach, but one that dampens incentives for within-sector emission reductions.

And the agreement sets a two-year time frame for finalizing the crucial draft rules needed to determine what types of emissions units will be eligible for use in the program and ensure that they are not “double-counted” against other compliance obligations.

Such compromises, however, were crucial to garnering the support of a huge majority of ICAO’s member nations and getting the agreement across the finish line.

A good day for the climate

Some, including a few of my colleagues in the environmental movement, focus on the deal’s shortcomings to castigate it or at least damn it with very faint praise.

But letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is a luxury the world cannot afford – least of all the people of countries on the front lines of climate change, such as Jamaica, Burkina Faso and the Marshall Islands, whose representatives helped create momentum for the deal in the final days of the negotiations by eloquently urging ICAO to act.

Back home in New York the night after the deal was announced, my daughters, 11 and 14, asked how my day had been. I had to pause and let it sink in.

“Well, we got an international agreement that we’ve been working toward for many years that will limit carbon pollution from airplanes – and help make the future of the planet just a little bit safer” I told them. “So, yes, it was a very good day.”

10 climate solutions with a big impact krives October 11, 2016 - 03:15

See comments

"... the people of countries on the front lines of climate change, such as Jamaica, Burkina Faso and the Marshall Islands,"
That's interesting. Details? Thanks.

Joan October 11, 2016 at 8:08 pm

And will this even include chemtrail emissions? (geoengineering) I certainly hope so. Our sky is usually full of that nasty stuff.

Susan Miller October 12, 2016 at 4:52 am

Letting the enough be the enemy of the not enough is a luxury the world must afford. [The implementation of a] a carbon tax now is the only way we'll make it through a narrow window that is closing fast.

SteveF October 13, 2016 at 12:32 pm

Cutting carbon pollution from aviation: A major breakthrough years in the making

Five years ago, I had one of the hardest tasks in government for someone who cares about climate action: running an interagency process in the White House on addressing carbon dioxide emissions from international aviation.

To put it mildly, climate action in the aviation sector was at an impasse.

The European Union was seeking to extend its greenhouse gas emission trading system to include international flights to and from Europe. The EU was well within its legal rights, and a range of studies showed that despite significant emission reductions the costs to passengers would be slight.

But the political opposition was widespread and fierce.

India had gone ballistic at the idea. Russia threatened to deny Europe access to its airspace. China said it would cancel orders for European aircraft. 

In the United States, meanwhile, not a single senator was willing to block legislation that railed against Europe’s proposal to cover American air carriers.

And yet, last week, the 191 member states of the International Civil Aviation Organization agreed to the first-ever cap on carbon pollution from a global sector, adopting by broad acclaim a market-based measure on carbon dioxide emissions from international flights.

The agreement, while not perfect, is significant – not only for the emissions reductions it promises to achieve, but also because of the circuitous journey that got us here.

3 signs we’re entering a golden age for carbon markets

The impetus to find a way out of the impasse came from two quarters.

The first was a business imperative. What the aviation industry feared more than anything was a patchwork of regulations – one approach in Europe, another in the U.S. and still another in China. That made the industry, a strong opponent of the EU’s plan, willing to come to the table to get a global deal.

The second was the Obama administration’s commitment to climate action. If we couldn’t overcome the widespread opposition to Europe moving ahead, could we leverage the threat of EU action to land an international agreement?

ICAO, the aviation agency of the United Nations, had already agreed in 2010 to explore policy options to achieve a global solution. So in the fall of 2011, I raised the idea of pivoting to ICAO in a conversation with Mike Froman, then the White House Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs.

A breakthrough came the following spring, when Tony Tyler, head of the International Air Transport Association, met with Mike and made it clear that the industry would support a robust market-based measure in ICAO.

EU: Get a deal or else

That summer, U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern held the first of a series of informal meetings among countries to discuss an ICAO solution.

Meanwhile, the administration worked to ensure that when the anti-E.U. legislation was passed by Congress that autumn, it directed the administration to negotiate a global approach.

Work on a global market-based approach accelerated once ICAO agreed in 2013 to develop a proposal for formal consideration.

The EU kept the pressure on by making clear that it would reinstate its coverage of international flights if ICAO failed to act.

The industry remained supportive, just as Tony Tyler had pledged back in 2012. Environmental Defense Fund and our partners in the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which EDF helped to found 20 years ago, published economic and legal analyses and provided technical support to governments, including through expert participation in ICAO working groups.

My former colleagues in the Obama administration spearheaded the effort to reach an agreement and put on a full-court diplomatic press in the last few weeks to secure participation from as many countries as possible.

Nations: We’ll move if we can compromise

The global market-based measure announced in Montreal last week will reduce carbon pollution by an estimated 2.5 billion tons over the first fifteen years of the program. It signals continued momentum on climate action, and positions the aviation sector as an engine of demand for high-quality emissions reductions around the world.

Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is a luxury the world cannot afford.

To be sure, the agreement is not perfect. An ideal agreement would apply to all anticipated emissions growth, whereas the deal currently covers 76 percent – although that will rise if more nations join.

The “carbon-neutral growth” target must be strengthened over time if the aviation sector is to do its fair share to address climate change – which is why the agreement includes provisions for regular review in light of the Paris Agreement’s long-term temperature goals.

To accommodate the concerns of fast-growing emerging markets, the agreement initially ties each air carrier’s responsibility to the sector’s overall emissions growth, not just its own emissions – arguably a more equitable approach, but one that dampens incentives for within-sector emission reductions.

And the agreement sets a two-year time frame for finalizing the crucial draft rules needed to determine what types of emissions units will be eligible for use in the program and ensure that they are not “double-counted” against other compliance obligations.

Such compromises, however, were crucial to garnering the support of a huge majority of ICAO’s member nations and getting the agreement across the finish line.

A good day for the climate

Some, including a few of my colleagues in the environmental movement, focus on the deal’s shortcomings to castigate it or at least damn it with very faint praise.

But letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is a luxury the world cannot afford – least of all the people of countries on the front lines of climate change, such as Jamaica, Burkina Faso and the Marshall Islands, whose representatives helped create momentum for the deal in the final days of the negotiations by eloquently urging ICAO to act.

Back home in New York the night after the deal was announced, my daughters, 11 and 14, asked how my day had been. I had to pause and let it sink in.

“Well, we got an international agreement that we’ve been working toward for many years that will limit carbon pollution from airplanes – and help make the future of the planet just a little bit safer” I told them. “So, yes, it was a very good day.”

10 climate solutions with a big impact krives October 11, 2016 - 03:15

See comments

"... the people of countries on the front lines of climate change, such as Jamaica, Burkina Faso and the Marshall Islands,"
That's interesting. Details? Thanks.

Joan October 11, 2016 at 8:08 pm

And will this even include chemtrail emissions? (geoengineering) I certainly hope so. Our sky is usually full of that nasty stuff.

Susan Miller October 12, 2016 at 4:52 am

Letting the enough be the enemy of the not enough is a luxury the world must afford. [The implementation of a] a carbon tax now is the only way we'll make it through a narrow window that is closing fast.

SteveF October 13, 2016 at 12:32 pm

A bright spot amid Brexit? Growing momentum for global climate action.

Last week’s vote by the British to leave the European Union has triggered a crisis in political leadership, thrown financial markets into turmoil and prompted eulogies for the European project – even as the ultimate consequences of the vote remain uncertain.

Against that backdrop, a bit of good news may be welcome. And it comes from an unlikely quarter: climate action.

That may sound surprising at first since climate change was hardly a high-profile issue in the Brexit campaign. Voting on the referendum reflected concerns about inequality, immigration, globalization, multiculturalism and an out-of-touch political elite.

Even so, the prospect of the United Kingdom’s departure has raised concerns about impacts on climate and energy policy, including possible delays in finalizing the EU’s 2030 emissions target.

But whatever the implications may be for Britain and the EU, one thing is clear: Brexit can’t derail the overwhelming global momentum on climate action that produced the Paris Agreement.

The Paris Agreement: Strength in numbers

A British exit from the EU would not have any effect on the formal architecture of the agreement, which was approved last December by more than 190 countries and has been signed by 177 – including each of the EU member states. 

Given that overwhelming support, the agreement may very well enter into force this year – something that will happen once at least 55 countries representing 55 percent of global emissions formally join the agreement.

To date, 50 countries representing more than 53 percent of global emissions have formally joined or committed to join the agreement this year — closing in on the threshold of 55 countries and 55 percent of emissions needed for the agreement to enter into force. As a result, the agreement may well enter into force as soon as this year, even without the EU (which was not expected to join the agreement this year in any case).

This signals a remarkable shift. A decade ago, Europe was the world’s indispensable leader on climate action – and even temporary uncertainty about the pace of progress in the EU would have had repercussions around the globe.

The Paris Agreement, however, was the culmination of a paradigm shift away from a model of “top-down” climate action concentrated in a handful of countries, and toward more a more decentralized and inclusive approach.

As climate action has become much more broad-based, it has also become more resilient.

Climate leadership beyond the EU

That is not to say that leadership on climate from both the U.K. and the EU is not vital; it is, and will continue to be. Taken as a whole, Europe is still the world’s third-largest emitter. It remains a powerful and valuable voice for ambition.

Fortunately, political support for climate action in the region remains high, with 60 percent of Europeans saying global warming is already harming people around the world.

But we are long past the days when climate progress depended on one bloc of countries. Just consider this:

• The leaders of the three North American countries met today to announce greater cooperation on climate change – including major new commitments on clean energy and on methane emissions from oil and gas.
• Under the leadership of President Obama, the United States is now a global leader on climate action, with U.S. emissions in 2014 at 9 percent below their 2005 level, and an ambitious target of reducing emissions between 26 and 28 percent by 2025, relative to 2005.
• President Xi Jinping of China has made tackling climate change a priority, with a commitment to ratify the Paris Agreement this year, a pledge to peak China’s emissions by 2030, if not before; and a plan to institute a nationwide emission trading program as early as next year.
• The unprecedented bilateral cooperation between the U.S. and China, culminating in the joint announcements on climate change made by Presidents Xi and Obama in November 2014 and again in September 2015, were a crucial step in laying the foundation for success in Paris.
• Brazil – although currently engulfed in political turmoil of its own – has reduced emissions over the past decade more than any other country, thanks to the enormous success of its Amazon states in curbing tropical deforestation.
• India, where the moral imperative of poverty alleviation remains paramount, is committing to renewable energy and experimenting with new models of low-carbon development.

Other factors driving momentum

Underlying these country-level shifts are more fundamental drivers. The impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly more visible, in record temperatures and extreme weather events.

A clean energy revolution is underway: Wind power is competitive with coal in much of the world even without subsidies, the cost of solar panels has dropped 75 percent in less than a decade and new technologies for how we use and store energy more efficiently are transforming markets.

Meanwhile, leading companies are stepping up by reducing their carbon footprints, greening their supply chains and calling for policies such as a price on carbon.

In short, leaders around the world have come to the realization that the path to shared global prosperity is a low-carbon path.

That makes the politics of climate action more resilient now than they ever have been before. And that is good news to keep in mind in these uncertain days.

4 signs we’re getting serious about cutting methane Anonymous June 29, 2016 - 05:20

A bright spot amid Brexit? Growing momentum for global climate action.

Last week’s vote by the British to leave the European Union has triggered a crisis in political leadership, thrown financial markets into turmoil and prompted eulogies for the European project – even as the ultimate consequences of the vote remain uncertain.

Against that backdrop, a bit of good news may be welcome. And it comes from an unlikely quarter: climate action.

That may sound surprising at first since climate change was hardly a high-profile issue in the Brexit campaign. Voting on the referendum reflected concerns about inequality, immigration, globalization, multiculturalism and an out-of-touch political elite.

Even so, the prospect of the United Kingdom’s departure has raised concerns about impacts on climate and energy policy, including possible delays in finalizing the EU’s 2030 emissions target.

But whatever the implications may be for Britain and the EU, one thing is clear: Brexit can’t derail the overwhelming global momentum on climate action that produced the Paris Agreement.

The Paris Agreement: Strength in numbers

A British exit from the EU would not have any effect on the formal architecture of the agreement, which was approved last December by more than 190 countries and has been signed by 177 – including each of the EU member states. 

Given that overwhelming support, the agreement may very well enter into force this year – something that will happen once at least 55 countries representing 55 percent of global emissions formally join the agreement.

To date, 50 countries representing more than 53 percent of global emissions have formally joined or committed to join the agreement this year — closing in on the threshold of 55 countries and 55 percent of emissions needed for the agreement to enter into force. As a result, the agreement may well enter into force as soon as this year, even without the EU (which was not expected to join the agreement this year in any case).

This signals a remarkable shift. A decade ago, Europe was the world’s indispensable leader on climate action – and even temporary uncertainty about the pace of progress in the EU would have had repercussions around the globe.

The Paris Agreement, however, was the culmination of a paradigm shift away from a model of “top-down” climate action concentrated in a handful of countries, and toward more a more decentralized and inclusive approach.

As climate action has become much more broad-based, it has also become more resilient.

Climate leadership beyond the EU

That is not to say that leadership on climate from both the U.K. and the EU is not vital; it is, and will continue to be. Taken as a whole, Europe is still the world’s third-largest emitter. It remains a powerful and valuable voice for ambition.

Fortunately, political support for climate action in the region remains high, with 60 percent of Europeans saying global warming is already harming people around the world.

But we are long past the days when climate progress depended on one bloc of countries. Just consider this:

• The leaders of the three North American countries met today to announce greater cooperation on climate change – including major new commitments on clean energy and on methane emissions from oil and gas.
• Under the leadership of President Obama, the United States is now a global leader on climate action, with U.S. emissions in 2014 at 9 percent below their 2005 level, and an ambitious target of reducing emissions between 26 and 28 percent by 2025, relative to 2005.
• President Xi Jinping of China has made tackling climate change a priority, with a commitment to ratify the Paris Agreement this year, a pledge to peak China’s emissions by 2030, if not before; and a plan to institute a nationwide emission trading program as early as next year.
• The unprecedented bilateral cooperation between the U.S. and China, culminating in the joint announcements on climate change made by Presidents Xi and Obama in November 2014 and again in September 2015, were a crucial step in laying the foundation for success in Paris.
• Brazil – although currently engulfed in political turmoil of its own – has reduced emissions over the past decade more than any other country, thanks to the enormous success of its Amazon states in curbing tropical deforestation.
• India, where the moral imperative of poverty alleviation remains paramount, is committing to renewable energy and experimenting with new models of low-carbon development.

Other factors driving momentum

Underlying these country-level shifts are more fundamental drivers. The impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly more visible, in record temperatures and extreme weather events.

A clean energy revolution is underway: Wind power is competitive with coal in much of the world even without subsidies, the cost of solar panels has dropped 75 percent in less than a decade and new technologies for how we use and store energy more efficiently are transforming markets.

Meanwhile, leading companies are stepping up by reducing their carbon footprints, greening their supply chains and calling for policies such as a price on carbon.

In short, leaders around the world have come to the realization that the path to shared global prosperity is a low-carbon path.

That makes the politics of climate action more resilient now than they ever have been before. And that is good news to keep in mind in these uncertain days.

4 signs we’re getting serious about cutting methane Anonymous June 29, 2016 - 05:20

Report back from Paris: What the new climate deal means – and where we go from here

The United Nations climate agreement in Paris, and the intense negotiations leading up to it, were a breakthrough in a number of important ways.

First of all, the agreement represents the coming of age of climate diplomacy. It was evident from the beginning that French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who chaired the talks, had the full trust and confidence of the room.

He artfully identified a zone of agreement among 196 delegations that gave nearly everyone something they wanted without crossing red lines.

The agreement was also the culmination of months of bilateral diplomacy at the highest levels, most visibly between the U.S. and China. The direct involvement of President Obama and other world leaders was critical to success – and shows a strategic savvy and leader-level involvement that we haven’t seen in past climate talks.

But it’s the language of the agreement itself, and the broad backing it received, that makes it such a big deal. It means that we now have a chance – not a guarantee, but a chance – to put the world on a healthier path.

What COP21 achieved

We know that the COP21 commitments so far will not deliver all the emissions reductions we need. That’s why the heart of the deal is the process it establishes to review countries’ progress toward meeting their commitments, and to ratchet up ambition over time.

The Paris deal:

• Lays out a common, transparent, and legally binding framework for countries to report their emissions regularly and undergo a technical expert review.

• Includes regular assessments and strengthening of commitments every five years, beginning in 2020. 

• Includes strong provisions against double-counting of emissions reductions, to make sure that every ton of emissions reductions is only counted once — a critical safeguard for environmental integrity.

That strong framework for transparency and review is critical because it will provide the accountability needed to keep pressure on countries to meet their commitments. And it will send a strong signal to energy producers, world markets and governments that the future lies in clean energy.

As a result, it will drive investments, policy choices and a fundamental shift in decision-making. As an economist, I’ve seen it over and over again: Once strong rules are in place, the money follows.

187 countries, 99% of emissions onboard 

Critics have complained that the deal does not penalize countries that don’t meet their emission targets. But the greater flexibility inherent in that non-binding approach made possible the most striking aspect of the Paris outcome: the broad participation underlying the agreement.

As of today, 187 countries covering almost 99 percent of global emissions have submitted commitments to take action on climate.  Joining them were more than 120 states, provinces and cities that made strong commitments of their own – along with many of the world’s largest companies.

The Paris conference did not create this wave of momentum on climate action – but it will provide an important boost to keep it going.

With an eye toward markets

The unsung hero of the agreement, meanwhile, is a set of provisions that encourages the use of markets to drive up investment in clean energy and drive down pollution.

You won’t find the word “markets” in the text.  But that is what the agreement is referring to, when it lays out clear rules for “cooperative approaches that involve the use of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes.”

By affirming a role for this powerful tool, the agreement recognizes the realities already on the ground, where emission trading systems are already at work in more than 50 places that are home to nearly 1 billion people. 

What’s more, the deal strikes the right balance between “bottom-up” and “top-down.” Carbon markets will continue to be driven and shaped by national priorities. The UN’s role will be limited to providing clear guidance to ensure that when countries choose to use markets internationally, the  emissions reductions are correctly tracked and accounted for.

The role of markets may not be in this week’s headlines – but a decade from now, it will be one of the enduring legacies of Paris.

Next: Keeping up the pressure

Over the course of the two-week long conference, I and my colleagues from Environmental Defense Fund walked the halls and worked the delegation rooms, talking with reporters, negotiators and fellow activists.

We pushed for accountability, transparency, forest protection, an opening for markets, regular strengthening of national commitments – and, above all, for an agreement that would actually make a significant difference for the climate.

Together, we made progress because the nations of the world – developed and developing, north and south, large and small – moved beyond the old excuses for delay and pledged substantial cuts in the pollution that is damaging our climate.

When Fabius finally brought the gavel down on Saturday evening, formally adopting the agreement, I was sitting with hundreds of other attendees in a packed meeting room at the conference site, watching on closed-circuit TV.

We were bone-tired after a week of late nights and little sleep, but the mood was ebullient.

Three days later, the exhaustion has begun to fade. But the ebullience remains, along with the sense that we were witness to a transformative moment.

Now it’s up to all of us to keep up the pressure on nations – and to deliver on the promise of the Paris agreement.

4 signs we’re making progress on climate change Anonymous December 15, 2015 - 05:46

See comments

I hope we will be able to get the most out of this chance and that the job these days will translate into real results, and not only wishes. Will humanity have another chance after this?

Paris December 15, 2015 at 6:08 pm

Report back from Paris: What the new climate deal means – and where we go from here

The United Nations climate agreement in Paris, and the intense negotiations leading up to it, were a breakthrough in a number of important ways.

First of all, the agreement represents the coming of age of climate diplomacy. It was evident from the beginning that French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who chaired the talks, had the full trust and confidence of the room.

He artfully identified a zone of agreement among 196 delegations that gave nearly everyone something they wanted without crossing red lines.

The agreement was also the culmination of months of bilateral diplomacy at the highest levels, most visibly between the U.S. and China. The direct involvement of President Obama and other world leaders was critical to success – and shows a strategic savvy and leader-level involvement that we haven’t seen in past climate talks.

But it’s the language of the agreement itself, and the broad backing it received, that makes it such a big deal. It means that we now have a chance – not a guarantee, but a chance – to put the world on a healthier path.

What COP21 achieved

We know that the COP21 commitments so far will not deliver all the emissions reductions we need. That’s why the heart of the deal is the process it establishes to review countries’ progress toward meeting their commitments, and to ratchet up ambition over time.

The Paris deal:

• Lays out a common, transparent, and legally binding framework for countries to report their emissions regularly and undergo a technical expert review.

• Includes regular assessments and strengthening of commitments every five years, beginning in 2020. 

• Includes strong provisions against double-counting of emissions reductions, to make sure that every ton of emissions reductions is only counted once — a critical safeguard for environmental integrity.

That strong framework for transparency and review is critical because it will provide the accountability needed to keep pressure on countries to meet their commitments. And it will send a strong signal to energy producers, world markets and governments that the future lies in clean energy.

As a result, it will drive investments, policy choices and a fundamental shift in decision-making. As an economist, I’ve seen it over and over again: Once strong rules are in place, the money follows.

187 countries, 99% of emissions onboard 

Critics have complained that the deal does not penalize countries that don’t meet their emission targets. But the greater flexibility inherent in that non-binding approach made possible the most striking aspect of the Paris outcome: the broad participation underlying the agreement.

As of today, 187 countries covering almost 99 percent of global emissions have submitted commitments to take action on climate.  Joining them were more than 120 states, provinces and cities that made strong commitments of their own – along with many of the world’s largest companies.

The Paris conference did not create this wave of momentum on climate action – but it will provide an important boost to keep it going.

With an eye toward markets

The unsung hero of the agreement, meanwhile, is a set of provisions that encourages the use of markets to drive up investment in clean energy and drive down pollution.

You won’t find the word “markets” in the text.  But that is what the agreement is referring to, when it lays out clear rules for “cooperative approaches that involve the use of internationally transferred mitigation outcomes.”

By affirming a role for this powerful tool, the agreement recognizes the realities already on the ground, where emission trading systems are already at work in more than 50 places that are home to nearly 1 billion people. 

What’s more, the deal strikes the right balance between “bottom-up” and “top-down.” Carbon markets will continue to be driven and shaped by national priorities. The UN’s role will be limited to providing clear guidance to ensure that when countries choose to use markets internationally, the  emissions reductions are correctly tracked and accounted for.

The role of markets may not be in this week’s headlines – but a decade from now, it will be one of the enduring legacies of Paris.

Next: Keeping up the pressure

Over the course of the two-week long conference, I and my colleagues from Environmental Defense Fund walked the halls and worked the delegation rooms, talking with reporters, negotiators and fellow activists.

We pushed for accountability, transparency, forest protection, an opening for markets, regular strengthening of national commitments – and, above all, for an agreement that would actually make a significant difference for the climate.

Together, we made progress because the nations of the world – developed and developing, north and south, large and small – moved beyond the old excuses for delay and pledged substantial cuts in the pollution that is damaging our climate.

When Fabius finally brought the gavel down on Saturday evening, formally adopting the agreement, I was sitting with hundreds of other attendees in a packed meeting room at the conference site, watching on closed-circuit TV.

We were bone-tired after a week of late nights and little sleep, but the mood was ebullient.

Three days later, the exhaustion has begun to fade. But the ebullience remains, along with the sense that we were witness to a transformative moment.

Now it’s up to all of us to keep up the pressure on nations – and to deliver on the promise of the Paris agreement.

4 signs we’re making progress on climate change Anonymous December 15, 2015 - 05:46

See comments

I hope we will be able to get the most out of this chance and that the job these days will translate into real results, and not only wishes. Will humanity have another chance after this?

Paris December 15, 2015 at 6:08 pm

A stage and a spotlight for action: Why the Paris climate talks are different

We’ve come a long way since nations failed to reach an international climate agreement in Copenhagen six years ago.

No, we haven’t been able to halt the rise in greenhouse gas emissions or stabilize global temperatures. 2015 will likely be the hottest year on record.

What’s changed – even just in the past year  –  is the global resolve to address climate change in a meaningful way. Also new are the actors and, importantly, how these nations interact with one another.

This has changed expectations and clarified what the United Nations climate talks that kick off Nov. 30 can and must deliver.

A new approach for global climate action

The aim of the Paris conference, known as COP21, is to finalize a new agreement that will take effect in 2020 and provide a framework for climate action for the decades to come.

Gone are the days, however, when negotiators assigned obligations from the “top down” – and in the process left some countries out of the picture entirely. Paris embodies a new approach: Countries are now taking the lead, determining their own levels of commitments.

The goal is to get the broadest possible participation, and it’s working. More than 170 countries, accounting for well over 90 percent of global emissions, have submitted official pledges outlining what they will do to cut carbon pollution.

In effect, the U.N. process provides a “stage” for countries to make commitments – and to step up their efforts.

The flip side of this approach is that the Paris agreement must also establish a high bar for rigor and transparency in how countries report, verify and account for their emissions over time.

This spotlight fosters credibility and trust among countries, and helps build on the momentum that’s been growing worldwide.

Decentralization: The new paradigm

The Paris conference also heralds a new era of decentralized climate action – one that is driven by action in countries and states and provinces and cities around the world, rather than by the U.N. alone. 

This may be the single most significant shift since Copenhagen.

Two months ago, China announced it will roll out a national emissions trading program in 2017 – set to be the largest in the world, surpassing the European Union’s.

Earlier in the year, the Canadian province of Ontario announced it will develop its own cap-and-trade program and link up with the existing California-Quebec carbon market. Such market-based policies give industry a powerful incentive to reduce emissions.

In this new context, cooperation takes the form not only of a U.N. agreement but of a multitude of bilateral agreements, new coalitions, and public-private partnerships with business and civil society – reflecting the increasingly transnational nature of the world economy.

To its great credit, the U.N. has embraced this new reality, even creating a platform to showcase efforts outside the negotiations themselves.

No longer just a rich-country problem

Coming into Paris, there is a collective recognition that climate change is everybody’s problem – and that all countries, not just wealthy ones, need to do their fair share.

China has committed to peak its emissions by 2030. Brazil, which has reduced deforestation emissions by more than 75 percent in the last decade, took on an absolute cap on economy-wide emissions below historical levels. Even India has gotten into the mix, pledging a rapid build-up of solar power, among other measures.

Of course, the United States and the E.U., where emissions are already trending down, must do more. They also have a responsibility to help developing countries transition to robust low-carbon growth and adapt to climate change – as well as a strong self-interest in doing so.

The key test for success is whether the framework and the commitments made in Paris set the world on the right path to finally halt and reverse the centuries-long rise in emissions – and eventually put us on a downward trajectory toward climate safety.

4 signs we’re making progress on climate hparmelee November 25, 2015 - 05:38

See comments

Please keep me posted. I want to be among those who are committed to the salvation of this planet and the pursuit of a better future. Thank You.

William M Doyon November 30, 2015 at 2:43 pm

A stage and a spotlight for action: Why the Paris climate talks are different

We’ve come a long way since nations failed to reach an international climate agreement in Copenhagen six years ago.

No, we haven’t been able to halt the rise in greenhouse gas emissions or stabilize global temperatures. 2015 will likely be the hottest year on record.

What’s changed – even just in the past year  –  is the global resolve to address climate change in a meaningful way. Also new are the actors and, importantly, how these nations interact with one another.

This has changed expectations and clarified what the United Nations climate talks that kick off Nov. 30 can and must deliver.

A new approach for global climate action

The aim of the Paris conference, known as COP21, is to finalize a new agreement that will take effect in 2020 and provide a framework for climate action for the decades to come.

Gone are the days, however, when negotiators assigned obligations from the “top down” – and in the process left some countries out of the picture entirely. Paris embodies a new approach: Countries are now taking the lead, determining their own levels of commitments.

The goal is to get the broadest possible participation, and it’s working. More than 170 countries, accounting for well over 90 percent of global emissions, have submitted official pledges outlining what they will do to cut carbon pollution.

In effect, the U.N. process provides a “stage” for countries to make commitments – and to step up their efforts.

The flip side of this approach is that the Paris agreement must also establish a high bar for rigor and transparency in how countries report, verify and account for their emissions over time.

This spotlight fosters credibility and trust among countries, and helps build on the momentum that’s been growing worldwide.

Decentralization: The new paradigm

The Paris conference also heralds a new era of decentralized climate action – one that is driven by action in countries and states and provinces and cities around the world, rather than by the U.N. alone. 

This may be the single most significant shift since Copenhagen.

Two months ago, China announced it will roll out a national emissions trading program in 2017 – set to be the largest in the world, surpassing the European Union’s.

Earlier in the year, the Canadian province of Ontario announced it will develop its own cap-and-trade program and link up with the existing California-Quebec carbon market. Such market-based policies give industry a powerful incentive to reduce emissions.

In this new context, cooperation takes the form not only of a U.N. agreement but of a multitude of bilateral agreements, new coalitions, and public-private partnerships with business and civil society – reflecting the increasingly transnational nature of the world economy.

To its great credit, the U.N. has embraced this new reality, even creating a platform to showcase efforts outside the negotiations themselves.

No longer just a rich-country problem

Coming into Paris, there is a collective recognition that climate change is everybody’s problem – and that all countries, not just wealthy ones, need to do their fair share.

China has committed to peak its emissions by 2030. Brazil, which has reduced deforestation emissions by more than 75 percent in the last decade, took on an absolute cap on economy-wide emissions below historical levels. Even India has gotten into the mix, pledging a rapid build-up of solar power, among other measures.

Of course, the United States and the E.U., where emissions are already trending down, must do more. They also have a responsibility to help developing countries transition to robust low-carbon growth and adapt to climate change – as well as a strong self-interest in doing so.

The key test for success is whether the framework and the commitments made in Paris set the world on the right path to finally halt and reverse the centuries-long rise in emissions – and eventually put us on a downward trajectory toward climate safety.

4 signs we’re making progress on climate hparmelee November 25, 2015 - 05:38

See comments

Please keep me posted. I want to be among those who are committed to the salvation of this planet and the pursuit of a better future. Thank You.

William M Doyon November 30, 2015 at 2:43 pm