Climate 411

How our clean energy laws can support a fair transition for workers and communities

photo of a coal plant

Our country is going to rapidly deploy and manufacture clean energy technologies to a scale never seen before, thanks in large part to historic laws passed by the Biden-Harris administration and Congress.

This shift is already unleashing new jobs and economic opportunities around the country, but many communities reliant on fossil fuel production – coal, oil and gas – are rightfully concerned about how it will affect their lives and their futures.

Last month, the Biden-Harris administration announced a sweeping set of new investments under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act aimed at revitalizing communities dependent on coal and fossil fuels. It’s a recognition that the clean energy transition cannot succeed unless it’s fair and equitable.

For over 150 years, coal and other fossil fuel workers have worked to power our economy. As natural gas and clean energy outcompeted coal in the last decade, hundreds of coal plants and mines across the country have shuttered, while the communities that depended on them have often been left behind – facing job loss, with funding for schools and roads running dry, and a legacy of local pollution to reckon with.

Recognizing the challenges facing fossil fuel communities in transition, the administration responded with a “whole-of-government” approach, bringing 12 different agencies together through the Interagency Working Group on Coal and Power Plant Communities and Economic Revitalization. In the past two years, the group has driven $14 billion in targeted investment to these communities.

The latest set of actions takes that support to new levels, not just by dollar amount, but in how it deploys a suite of different policies to help make communities whole – from job and benefits programs for individual workers to large-scale economic development that can sustain communities. While more support will be needed, this kind of comprehensive approach has been recommended by many groups, including joint research from EDF and Resources for the Future, as well as by the BlueGreen Alliance and Just Transition Fund.

Here’s a quick look at how some of these new investments take aim at critical challenges facing energy communities, and what needs to happen next:

Read More »

Posted in Cars and Pollution, Cities and states, Economics, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Health, Innovation, Jobs, News, Policy / Comments are closed

New York lawmakers have a chance to lead on climate. They must take it.

Photo of the New York state capitol building

As the New York legislature’s budget deliberations drag well into April, they still have the opportunity to pass a budget that would pave the way for the state to have one of the most ambitious and equitable climate programs in the country.

Right now, a bold cap-and-invest program is on the table as part of the state’s ongoing budget discussions. In December 2022, the Climate Action Council, a group of experts and stakeholders charged with developing a plan to meet New York’s climate goals, chose cap-and-invest as a key option to advance because it marries ambition, affordability and equity. The program would set an overall limit—or cap—on the state’s emissions that lowers over time, with the aim of reaching New York’s statutory climate goals, a 40% reduction in emissions by 2030, and at least 85% from 1990 levels by 2050. Major polluters under the cap would pay for their limited emissions through allowances. As the cap lowers over time, so would the number of available emissions allowances, incentivizing businesses to make cost-effective decisions on how to cut their pollution—which supports the overall affordability of meeting NY climate targets—such as investing in cleaner sources of energy. Alongside tackling climate change, the program can center equity by putting in place guardrails that protect disadvantaged communities (DACs) from local pollution and by directing revenues raised to these communities and other low- and middle-income communities.

The Assembly should support legislation in the budget that directs the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to make this proposal a reality and develop a robust cap-and-invest program with built-in programs to ensure affordability, protect and prioritize DACs and support clean energy investments alongside other critical climate policies like NY HEAT. 

Here are three reasons why acting now can create a safer, healthier, and more affordable future for New Yorkers.

1.  Legislative direction on the use of cap-and-invest revenues is the best way to ensure affordability and equity.

Passing a budget that provides clear direction regarding how to spend cap-and-invest revenues is critical for ensuring that these funds are used in ways to enhance affordability and equity, including by:

  • Establishing rebate programs to directly defray any near-term cost increases New Yorkers may face, with a priority for directing those funds to DACs and other low- and middle-income New Yorkers who are the most vulnerable to any price increases.
  • Directing funds—again with prioritization for investments in DACs—toward energy and climate projects that will lower costs and reduce exposure to pollution for New Yorkers. For example, energy efficiency and low-cost renewable electricity can lower energy burden, and public transit investments can reduce transportation costs.
  • Funding just transition initiatives for workers and establishing high-road labor standards to ensure that clean energy jobs provide workers with security and good wages and to protect fossil fuel industry workers from being left behind as the state transitions toward new clean technologies.

2.  This is the chance for the legislature to provide guidance on protection for DACs in a cap-and-invest program.

While the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) includes statutory requirements to reduce emissions in DACs and provides general principles for how DEC should design cap-and-invest to protect and prioritize DACs, more specific direction to DEC is warranted regarding the need to ensure that a cap-and-invest program specifically—as distinct from the state’s climate actions more generally—must be designed to prioritize pollution cuts in DACs. While we believe that many of the specific program design details can be addressed through the regulatory process, guiding principles are needed. For example, the legislature should explore whether to include specific program design elements such as limiting emission allowance purchases by facilities located in DACs. However, in doing so the legislature should ensure that DEC maintains a level of authority capable of delivering a cap-and-invest program that is able to both put in place strict guardrails to protect DACs and develop a program capable of supporting lower-cost and deeper emission reductions than would be possible without a cap-and-invest program in place.

3.  Combining legislative direction on cap-and-invest with complementary policies to decarbonize buildings and support long-term affordability will bolster a cap-and- invest program and target equitable outcomes.

A cap-and-invest program is important to limit total pollution with the greatest possible certainty, and with some program flexibility cap-and-invest can also reduce the total cost of meeting New York’s climate goals–thereby increasing affordability. However, complementary policies are also critically important for accelerating emission reductions in key sectors and can further help reduce long-term costs by supporting the transition to energy efficiency and lower-cost clean energy. To that end, the legislature should pass programs like NY HEAT and All-Electric Buildings alongside guidance on cap-and-invest. These programs would help address New York’s largest emitting sectors and support long-term affordability by limiting costly, decades-long investments in fossil fuel infrastructure.

Now is the time for the legislature to act. There are less than seven years until 2030 and significant policy interventions are still required to cut pollution in line with the state’s CLCPA goals. The legislature has the opportunity not only to ensure the Department of Environmental Conservation, Public Service Commission, and other state regulators have all the authority and tools they need, but also to provide enormous benefits to New Yorkers by establishing the policies necessary to make the clean energy transition affordable, equitable, and just for working families.

Posted in Cities and states, Economics, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, News, Policy / Comments are closed

Governor Youngkin’s RGGI rollback is wrongheaded and unpopular

Richmond, Virginia

Photo credit: Canva

Since joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in 2020, Virginia has started capping harmful pollution from power plants, growing clean energy jobs across the state and providing more than $500 million in investments for flood resilience in communities and money-saving energy efficiency in households.

But since his first day in office, Governor Youngkin has been determined to pull Virginia out of this proven climate program that has been implemented by Democrat and Republican governors alike.

The administration’s rollback threatens progress right as the threats from climate change – and opportunities from clean energy investment – are clearer than ever for the Commonwealth.

Virginia’s Air Pollution Control Board voted in favor of continuing with the withdrawal, moving the process forward, but two major roadblocks continue to stand in the way: The overwhelming majority of Virginians said they oppose the repeal, and neither the Youngkin administration’s Air Pollution Control Board nor Department of Environmental Quality has the legal authority to exit the program.

The most recent steps in the RGGI repeal process shine a spotlight on how misguided and out-of-touch the administration’s climate rollback is.

Read More »

Posted in Cities and states, Policy, Setting the Facts Straight / Comments are closed

The climate benefits of informed forestry practices

Pine plantation forest in Australia. iStock

This post was authored by Cyril Melikov, Senior Research Analyst of Natural Climate Solutions at EDF. 

Forests planted for commercial purposes can help slow down climate change. How? With improved forestry management that uses forestry practices that increase the amount of carbon stored in commercial forests.
The idea is that foresters and land managers can put forestry practices in place that will raise the carbon levels in the plantation forests they manage, thus helping slow climate change.

For example, foresters could harvest trees at an older age than the age at which they would normally be harvested (known as extending the rotation length). Or they could plant several trees species in the same tree plantation (known as mixed planting) as opposed to planting only one tree species. Or they could add nutrients to the soil using inorganic or organic nutrient sources (known as fertilization).

All these practices could add carbon to plantation forests. Their study has gained traction over the past decade as improved forest management could represent a cost-effective and rapidly deployable natural climate solution, or NCS. It’s a promising avenue for climate change mitigation.

Read More »

Posted in Innovation, International, Science / Comments are closed

As another legislative session ends, how does New Mexico regain climate leadership?

Photo Credit: Getty Images

With each passing year, communities across New Mexico feel the mounting and undeniable pressures from climate change. At times last year, nearly three-fourths of the state was experiencing severe drought. The largest wildfire in the state’s recorded history ripped through New Mexico communities. And mountain snowpack, even in snowy winters, produces less and less water for people and wildlife.

New Mexicans can see clearly how fundamental aspects of their culture and identity are threatened — and want their state leaders to act.

Read More »

Posted in Cities and states, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Health, News, Policy / Comments are closed

Forest climate finance must be more equitable to support Indigenous Peoples and local communities

This post was co-authored by Julia Paltseva, Senior Analyst at EDF, and Tuntiak Katan from the Coordinator of Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon River Basin (COICA). For more resources on high forest, low deforestation (HFLD) crediting, visit edf.org/hfld. This post has also been translated into Spanish and French (leer en español, lire en français).

Tuntiak Katan of the Coordinator of Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon Basin (COICA). Photo by Leslie Von Pless, EDF

Forests are an essential part of the climate change solution, and their effective conservation requires the empowerment of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, or IPLCs. Around the world, IPLCs have stewarded forests for generations. However, in the face of growing economic pressures to cut forests down, current incentives designed to keep forests standing are largely inaccessible to communities living in areas of historically low forest loss, known as high forest, low deforestation regions, or HFLD.

An effective and equitable global REDD+ incentive-system for reducing deforestation should reward all relevant jurisdictions and actors, including both historical emitters and historical protectors of carbon stock, like IPLCs. We must eliminate forest loss in areas where it is already occurring. At the same time, we must also avoid future increases in deforestation in areas of historically low forest loss – HFLD regions.

Guardians of the forest
Indigenous Peoples and local communities are some of the best forest protectors, especially when equipped with strong tenure and land rights. In Mesoamerica, IPLCs steward half of forested areas. In the Amazon, Indigenous Peoples manage more than 30% of the rainforest, and satellite imagery shows deforestation rates in Indigenous territories are roughly half of what they are in similar surrounding lands. IPLCs typically practice sustainable forest management, through agroforestry and low-impact agriculture, allowing them to both provide for their needs and effectively conserve the forests.

Despite a successful track record of maintaining intact forests, forest communities have directly received less than one percent of international government aid for climate change mitigation and adaptation over the last decade.

Read More »

Posted in Carbon Markets, Forest protection, Indigenous People, International, REDD+ / Comments are closed