Climate change solutions
We deliver game-changing environmental solutions that have a real impact for people around the globe.
By Elizabeth Sturcken & Marissa Nixon
A new model of leadership is developing across the freight sector. Industry leaders are moving decisively and setting a new standard of efficiency through sustainability initiatives, while others risk falling behind. The transition to zero-emission transportation is no longer just an environmental consideration — it is quickly becoming a defining factor in operational performance and competitive positioning.
A new report from Environmental Defense Fund is showcasing where leadership is taking shape across top companies, and where quiet competition is underway. The report, Four actions fleets must take to be sustainability leaders today: Benchmarking the transition to zero-emission fleets, summarizes analysis of public reports and practices among the top 100 U.S. fleets. The report demonstrates how top fleets are thinking about sustainability, and how they plan to turn ambition into action.
Fuel cost volatility is a significant business risk. Diesel, already one of the largest components of fleets’ operating expenses, has recently exceeded $5 per gallon nationally, underscoring how rapidly energy costs can shift. For companies managing large transportation networks, these price swings create real business risks, leaving freight operators exposed to external market forces and volatility. Fuel costs affect operating margins, supply chain planning and long-term investment decisions.
Sustainability is no longer separate from financial performance. Price swings affect operating margins, supply chain planning and long-term investment decisions. Transitioning to zero-emission technologies, such as electrification, offers a path to reduce fuel cost volatility, improve energy efficiency and stabilize long-term operating expenses.
EDF’s Four Actions for Fleet Leadership provides a practical framework for turning transportation sustainability into operational practice. Analysis in the report shows that leadership is not defined by any single action, but how companies align commitments, planning, deployment and industry engagement to reinforce progress and enable long-term success.
The report also highlights examples of how leading fleets are approaching this transition. For example, of the 100 companies reviewed, 60 have publicly stated transportation-related sustainability goals and 26 have committed to transitioning to zero-emission fleets or broader net-zero operations. Most companies with stated goals include timelines and interim milestones, though fewer provide detailed transition plans or deployment strategies.
These findings suggest that while progress is underway, fleets have an opportunity to strengthen execution and reinforce progress across all four leadership areas. Here, leadership is not defined by any single initiative, but by how effectively organizations align commitments, strategic planning, deployment and industry engagement to drive measurable progress.
This report highlights companies, including NFI, PepsiCo and US Foods, that are demonstrating this approach in practice by pairing long-term goals with deployment milestones, operational pilots, or supplier engagement strategies to advance transportation sustainability.“Sustainability covers more than just emissions reduction; it also includes lowering freight costs and increasing efficiency,” shares Mike Roeth, Executive Director at NACFE.
“The companies making the most progress are those connecting real-world action with longer-term planning to build more efficient and sustainable operations over time. Analyses like this help identify what leading fleets are doing differently and where the industry is headed.”
EDF’s latest report highlights where fleets are making meaningful progress, and where greater ambition is needed. For fleet operators and corporate leaders, this is an opportunity to understand how peers are navigating this transition, assess how current efforts align with emerging best practices and identify where to go further.
Amid ongoing pressure to improve cost efficiency and manage energy risk, leading companies are prioritizing transportation sustainability as a core business priority. Expectations from customers, investors, and employees are reinforcing the need for credible net-zero and zero-emission transportation strategies. Companies that align ambition with execution will be well positioned to mitigate volatility, enhance operational performance, and remain competitive as market dynamics and policy landscapes continue to evolve.
Read the full report to explore the data, see how your company compares, and identify the next steps to strengthen your fleet strategy.
By Richard Kiplagat and Angela Churie Kallhauge, this article originally appeared in The Petroleum Economist.
As global gas markets tightened in March, a tanker carrying LNG from Nigeria to France abruptly changed course towards Asia. The diversion was a small but telling signal of a larger reality: supply is constrained, competition is intensifying and every available cargo is being pulled towards the highest bidder.
At the same time, vast volumes of African gas are going to waste.
Methane that is routinely leaked, flared or vented into the atmosphere across the continent is both wasteful and damaging because methane is a powerful climate pollutant. But methane emissions are also a market failure. Unlike carbon dioxide, methane is not a useless energy byproduct—it is the product. Every tonne emitted is energy that could be used domestically or sold abroad as natural gas.
21bcm/yr – Estimated gas lost through flaring and leakage in Algeria, Libya and Egypt
At a moment of global disruption, that distinction matters. The war in the Middle East has disrupted roughly 20% of global oil and gas flows, tightening LNG supply chains and pushing prices higher. Yet this same moment presents a clear opportunity. By reducing methane emissions and gas flaring, African producers can increase supply, generate revenue and strengthen energy security without waiting years for new projects to come online.
The scale of the opportunity is substantial. According to the IEA, Africa’s energy sector emitted an estimated 17mt of methane in 2025. Every cubic metre released into the atmosphere is gas that could otherwise power homes, support industry or be exported at a premium in today’s market, leveraging Africa’s underutilised gas export capacity.
The continent can export nearly 80mt/yr of LNG, yet many facilities operate well below capacity due to upstream supply constraints. In Algeria, LNG exports in 2025 reached just 9.5mt, according to the Middle East Economic Survey, less than half of its installed capacity of 25.3mt/yr, as per Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers data. Even in Nigeria, where LNG facilities run closer to full capacity, methane leaks and infrastructure challenges continue to limit supply.
Capturing this gas offers a rare alignment of economic, energy and climate priorities. In North Africa alone, Algeria, Libya and Egypt lose an estimated 21bcm/yr of gas through flaring and leakage, according to calculations by Capterio. This is equivalent to around 14% of their production and up to $6b in lost annual revenue. Much of this waste can be addressed using proven technologies, often at low or even negative cost once the value of captured gas is considered.
There are already examples of progress. Angola LNG has shown that gas that would otherwise be flared can be captured and commercialised at scale. In Algeria, flare gas recovery projects and partnerships with international operators are beginning to unlock similar value. Nigeria LNG has achieved high standards of methane measurement and reporting, demonstrating what is possible across a broader system.
This shift in attitudes towards methane is being reinforced by the world’s largest gas buyers. The EU’s Methane Regulation will introduce stricter requirements on measurement and reporting, with compliance expected in the next few years. At the same time, major LNG buyers, including Japan and South Korea, are backing initiatives that favour suppliers able to demonstrate credible methane reductions.
For African exporters, this is both a risk and an opportunity. Those who act early can secure access to premium markets and strengthen long-term demand. Those that do not risk being sidelined as emissions performance becomes a differentiator.
Importantly, African governments and NOCs are not starting from zero. Many are already engaged in initiatives such as the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0, which provides a framework for measuring and managing emissions. Others have committed to ending routine flaring and reducing methane under international pledges.
The challenge now is execution—which means focusing on practical steps that can deliver results quickly. Identifying high-emission assets, deploying leak detection and repair, investing in flare gas recovery and strengthening infrastructure to keep gas in the system. It also means mobilising financing, which is increasingly accessible as better data reduces risk and improves project bankability.
International partners and technical experts are ready to support these efforts. But leadership will need to come from within.
At a time when global supply is tight and prices are elevated, the value of every molecule of gas has increased. For Africa, the methane opportunity is immediate. The gas is already there, so the question is whether it will be captured or continue to slip away.
Richard Kiplagat is a senior stakeholder relations adviser to businesses, philanthropies and government leaders, specialising in sustainable development, infrastructure, and energy. He advises a portfolio of companies that have collectively invested over $5b in Africa and was a co-facilitator of the initial strategy workshops that led to the formulation of the African Union’s Agenda 2063. As chair of the African Hydrogen Partnership Advocacy Taskforce at Africa Practice, Richard is responsible for leading and coordinating a team of global and African green hydrogen industry players, engaging with policymakers and the private sector to create an environment that accelerates investment in green hydrogen.
Angela Churie Kallhauge is executive vice-president of impact at the Environmental Defense Fund, and is based in Washington, DC. A climate and energy policy expert, she joined EDF from the World Bank, where she led the Secretariat of the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition for five years. She previously spent 14 years at the Swedish Energy Agency working on carbon markets, climate policy and development, including serving as the EU’s lead negotiator on adaptation under the UNFCCC and representing Sweden on the Adaptation Fund Board.
Taxes aren’t the only thing due today– April 15th is also the deadline for signatories of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to submit their national greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory reports, which estimate annual GHG emissions by country.
The UNFCCC treaty was signed by all United Nations member states, but in February 2026 the United States announced it was withdrawing from it effective February 2027. This comes on the heels of the U.S. failing to submit a GHG inventory in April 2025, joining Russia as the only Annex 1 country to not meet their treaty obligations. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed GHG inventory reports since 1997 and has shown leadership by consistently exceeding the minimum requirements for detail and transparency and providing invaluable data and methods to other countries and academics developing their own inventories.
In response to this failure by the EPA, EDF submitted a Freedom of Information Act request and obtained the (already completed) 2025 GHG inventory, which we posted on our website. To date, the EPA appears to have not even begun working on the 2026 GHG inventory.
The University of Maryland Steps Up
The University of Maryland Center for Global Sustainability (CGS) recently created a foundational report called Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Analysis for the United States (GHGIA) using the data and methods underlying earlier inventories. The report from University of Maryland (UMD) estimates the country’s annual GHG emissions by sector from 1990 to 2024. It’s a watershed moment of U.S. universities and scientists continuing to build on critical scientific work that helps policymakers and stakeholders address climate and protect public health.
The main findings of the report are that total GHG emissions in 2024 were roughly 5,300 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents, a 3.8 percent decrease from 1990 and a 0.2 percent annual increase from 2023. UMD plans to update the GHGIA and use future reports as opportunities to innovate and improve on methods as new data and scientific techniques become available to more accurately estimate emissions. UMD should be applauded for completing the difficult task of providing the public with a rigorous, data-driven GHG inventory that helps us understand where emissions are coming from.
The GHG inventory is not a political issue – it is a science-based collection of data on the state of GHG emissions within the United States. Around the world, people and communities continue to act on this exact kind of scientific evidence, working to implement non-partisan solutions such as transitioning to renewable energy and eliminating methane emissions from the oil and gas industry. The UMD GHGIA report is scientifically robust and can be used by global stakeholders for many purposes, including informing their climate models. Critical scientific information such as the GHG inventory should be publicly available and shared with all who can use it. We are grateful that groups like UMD are stepping up to keep the world as informed as possible about greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.
Medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles are hitting the road in 2026, and we’ve collected last month’s most exciting news. In 2025, EDF delivered monthly deployment updates on the biggest zero-emission transportation stories. By the end of 2025, it was clear that momentum was sustained throughout a challenging year. This year will undoubtably see more big announcements, and we’ll be here to showcase the biggest orders and deployments of zero-emission trucks happening around the country.
March announcements included transportation improvements for ADA-accessible routes and students in Texas and Arizona, respectively and progress on zero-emission drayage systems in California.
Sun Metro unveils first zero-emissions electric fleet for Lift program in El Paso
Sun Metro introduced its first fleet of 45 zero-emission electric vehicles, a significant investment in cleaner, more dependable transit. The new vehicles will be added to the city’s LIFT program, which offers curb-to-curb transportation for individuals covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act. In addition to the new vehicles, Sun Metro plans to introduce charging stations as part of the rollout. The project is funded through the Federal Transit Administration’s Low or No-Emission program.
Hight Logistics highlights new Tesla Semi as it expands zero-emission fleet
Hight Logistics, a California based drayage company, recently debuted a new Tesla Semi during the TPM logistics conference. The electric Class 8 truck was used to transport a customer container directly to the event, highlighting an important step in the company’s move toward a zero-emission fleet. The company has emphasized a strong commitment to zero-emission trucks, noting that more customers are choosing Hight Logistics to help lower their carbon footprint and comply with evolving regulatory requirements. Hight Logistics currently operates 25 electric trucks, mostly Volvo VNR Electric models, and the company intends to expand its fleet with additional Tesla Semis. To support this growth, it has already installed six dual-charging stations at its facility, enabling up to 12 electric trucks to charge at the same time between port trips.
Tucson schools go green with new electric bus fleet
The Tucson Unified School District has introduced a new fleet of 10 electric school buses. This deployment will replace 10 older diesel buses, and it is projected to cut approximately 17,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions. The buses were acquired through RWC Group, with funding coming from a $4 million grant through the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean School Bus Program, $1.1 million in rebates from Tucson Electric Power and $1.2 million from the TUSD Bond Project. The deployment focuses on improving community health by providing a quieter, cleaner ride for students while helping reduce air pollution across local neighborhoods, contributing to a healthier future for the region.
Now is a critical time for fleets to invest in medium- and heavy-duty electric trucks. These vehicles improve public health and help combat the climate crisis by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Unlike traditional diesel-powered trucks, electric trucks produce no tailpipe emissions, which significantly cuts down on health-harming pollution. Adoption represents a key step toward a more sustainable and resilient transportation industry.
Check back here next month to see a collection of the most exciting zero-emission vehicle announcements from April. In the meantime, check out EDF’s Electric Fleet Deployment & Commitment List to track announcements as they happen in real time, and view all March announcements.
Check out last month’s announcements here.
By Jolette Westbrook and Rishab Jagetia
Massachusetts has some of the highest utility rates in the country. In response, on February 26, 2026, the state House passed a landmark energy affordability bill, H5151, aimed at lowering costs. The bill takes important steps to expand clean, affordable energy and provide near-term relief for customers.
But it also contains misguided cuts to energy-saving programs that benefit customers. The legislation directs utilities to cut $1 billion dollars from Mass Save, the Commonwealth’s nation-leading energy efficiency program. New analysis shows that this move risks driving costs higher, especially for low-income households.
Energy efficiency is a proven cost saver
For more than 15 years, Mass Save has helped Massachusetts residents and businesses cut energy use and lower bills. The program funds upgrades such as insulation, efficient appliances and modern heating and cooling systems that reduce waste, lower emissions and save money.
“Residents pay a monthly fee to fund Mass Save on their electric bill, but what’s less visible is how they benefit from all the costs they avoid,” said Chris Neme, a Principal at Energy Futures Group. “That includes energy they don’t use, power plants that don’t get built and price spikes that never happen.”
Mass Save reduces the need for costly infrastructure, lowers wholesale electricity prices and shields customers from fuel price swings. These system-wide benefits flow to every ratepayer. From 2022-2024, the program delivered nearly $2.4 billion in energy bill savings for MA families and businesses. Mass Save is projected to remain highly cost-effective, returning more than $2 in benefits for every dollar invested.
Mass Save prioritizes those who need it most
Energy efficiency programs are sometimes criticized for favoring wealthier households because they require upfront costs and are easier for homeowners – not renters – to access. Mass Save does the opposite.
The program directs significant funding to low- and moderate-income households and renters, who face the greatest barriers to lowering their energy bills. For 2025-2027, 26.2% of program spending is dedicated to low-income households, even though such households account for only about 13% of total electricity use in the state. From offering upgrades and improving language access support for non-English speakers to increasing support for renters, Mass Save helps the communities hit hardest by rising energy costs.
The program also strengthens the state’s workforce. In 2024, Mass Save supported over 76,000 jobs with median wages well above the state average. This is equivalent to three times the amount of renewable energy jobs and two-thirds of all the clean energy jobs in the state. In 2025 alone, the program invested $24 million in workforce training to grow the clean energy economy.
Cuts to Mass Save will hurt residents, not help them
H5151 suggests cutting $1 billion in administrative and marketing costs. In practice, such cuts will inevitably slash essential programs that reduce energy costs, lower bills, support higher-paying jobs, and expand access for environmental justice communities. Cuts would also jeopardize outside funding that state regulators have worked to secure, increasing the share of costs borne by ratepayers.
With energy bills skyrocketing in Massachusetts, the state should move quickly to accelerate clean, affordable energy development and avoid investment in unnecessary fossil fuel infrastructure. Cutting energy efficiency undermines those goals.
A proven solution we cannot afford to cut
Mass Save lowers bills, reduces pollution, and directs resources to the families that need them most. It is a cost-effective solution that continues to provide necessary benefits. If lawmakers want to address affordability and protect vulnerable communities, they should fully fund Mass Save, not cut it.
By Sofia Esquivel-Elizondo, Environmental Defense Fund, and Ilissa Ocko, Spark Climate Solutions
As countries and industries work towards decarbonizing sectors that are difficult to electrify – including aviation, shipping, heavy industry and commodity chemicals production – interest in alternative fuels is surging. Hydrogen, ammonia, methanol, synthetic methane and related fuels are attracting billions in investment and growing policy support. But these fuels are not inherently sustainable simply because they can be produced with low-carbon methods. Their climate and other environmental impacts depend on how they are produced, handled and used across the entire value chain. Getting these details right will determine whether alternative fuels deliver real climate progress or create new environmental risks.
Environmental Defense Fund’s new scientific perspective article, ‘Ensuring the climate and environmental integrity of alternative fuels’, published in Environmental Science & Technology, offers timely guidance on how to ensure that alternative fuels can deliver on their promise. The best results occur when alternative fuel value chains are thoughtfully designed and deployed from the start, and this paper offers insight into how to do so responsibly.
Alternative fuels can be powerful tools – when viewed as systems, not just molecules.
A key insight from this work is that sustainability is not an inherent property of a fuel itself. The same fuel molecule can have very different impacts depending on how it is produced, transported, stored, and used.
For example, a hydrogen molecule produced with low-emissions (“clean”) electricity and with tight emissions controls during its production, handling, and use can significantly reduce climate pollution in steelmaking or shipping. However, that same molecule produced with fossil energy that comes with high methane emissions, low carbon capture rates or leaky infrastructure can deliver far fewer climate benefits, and potentially even harms. This is especially relevant for the near term, when climate-warming emissions like methane and hydrogen are most potent in the atmosphere.
By focusing not just on individual fuels, but entire value chains, decision-makers can distinguish between pathways that truly support climate goals, environmental sustainability and long-term energy competitiveness and security, and those that fall short.
Climate and environmental integrity require looking beyond carbon dioxide alone.
Carbon dioxide matters, but it is not the whole emissions story. Other climate warming pollutants such as methane, hydrogen and nitrous oxide can have outsized impacts. Methane and hydrogen – both part of many alternative fuel value chains – are short-lived but potent climate warming gases, and therefore particularly relevant over the next few decades. Methane has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide over the first 20 years after it reaches the atmosphere, and hydrogen’s climate impact is estimated to be 37 times that of carbon dioxide over the 20 years following its release. Nitrous oxide, which is especially important in biomass, and nitrogen-based fuel pathways, is a long-lived gas that accumulates in the atmosphere. It is around 275 times more potent than carbon dioxide per mass on the 20-year and 100-year timescales.
Beyond climate impacts, non-carbon emissions also pose significant risks to air, water and ecosystems. Reactive nitrogen emissions, including ammonia (which is currently being considered for increased use in shipping and power systems) and nitrogen oxides and nitrogen dioxide (which occur during incomplete fuel combustion in engines and turbines), can degrade air quality, contribute to nitrogen pollution across land and water systems, and have either warming or cooling effects). Emissions of these climate and environmental pollutants occur – often unintentionally – through leakage, venting or combustion processes and are still under-measured in many assessments.
But these emissions are highly manageable. Monitoring technologies are progressing, mitigation strategies are well understood, and best practices are continuously improving. Accounting for these pollutants more comprehensively allows policymakers and industry to design and operate fuel value chains that maximize real-world climate and other environmental benefits.
Inputs and value chain decisions matter
The environmental performance of alternative fuels is shaped decisively by their inputs – the feedstocks and the energy used to convert them. Water and biomass residues and wastes can support climate and sustainability goals when sourced responsibly, while feedstocks that lead to water stress, compete with food production, drive land-use change or cause ecological harm can undermine them. Similarly, carbon-based hydrogen-derived fuels (e.g., e-methanol, e-diesel, and e-kerosene) perform very differently depending on where their carbon comes from. Using fossil-derived CO2 still contributes to warming because that fossil carbon is eventually released when the fuel is combusted, whereas atmospheric capture and sustainable biomass sources can be closer to carbon-neutral over time. Moreover, fuels produced with truly clean electricity can have significantly lower lifecycle impacts than those relying on fossil-based energy sources – but emissions impact can vary based on location, time and competing uses.
Beyond production, every stage of the value chain can lead to emissions that significantly affect climate, air quality, ecosystems and communities.
The science is clear: there are better and worse life-cycle pathways for every alternative fuel, and distinguishing between them early allows markets and policies to reward the best options.
Energy efficiency and smart prioritization accelerate progress.
Alternative fuels will be essential and could be truly sustainable but they should be used where they matter most. Producing fuels requires energy, often a lot of it. Each conversion step introduces energy losses, which means renewable electricity is generally most effective when used directly wherever possible.
This helps clarify the important role of fuels for specific purposes. Long-haul shipping and aviation, very high-temperature (>1000 °C) industrial processes and long-term energy storage are where alternative fuels offer the greatest system value. Prioritizing these uses ensures that limited renewable energy resources deliver the maximum climate and economic return.
This principle – sometimes described as the “best use of clean electrons” – helps align climate ambition with practical implementation.
Fuel diversity strengthens energy security and resilience.
Beyond reducing emissions, alternative fuels play an increasingly important role in energy security. A diversified energy system is more resilient to supply disruptions, price volatility, and geopolitical risk. Fuels that can be produced domestically from renewable electricity, sustainable biomass, or captured carbon offer countries new options to strengthen energy independence and build local economies.
But diversity alone is not enough. To fully realize these benefits, fuel systems must be built on durable foundations: reliable feedstocks, low life-cycle emissions, efficient infrastructure and strong environmental safeguards. Doing it right from the beginning avoids costly retrofits and ensures that today’s investments remain valuable in a net-zero future.
A practical, science-based roadmap for action.
What the scientific paper ultimately provides is a roadmap. It highlights the best-in-class practices for producers, investors, and policymakers – from sourcing truly clean electricity and sustainable (climate-beneficial) feedstocks to controlling unintended and operational emissions, minimizing pollution, and protecting communities.
It also outlines what comprehensive assessments should include if alternative fuels are to scale with integrity: thorough and transparent lifecycle accounting, short- and long-term climate impacts, air quality and health considerations, ecosystems and biodiversity impacts and opportunity costs. These recommendations are not barriers; they are tools for better decision-making.
The opportunity ahead
Alternative fuels can play a pivotal role in building a secure, resilient and climate-safe energy system. The technologies are advancing, the momentum is real, and the potential benefits are substantial. By applying systems thinking and ensuring science-based standards and best practices now, we can ensure that scale-up delivers lasting value – for the climate and environment, for communities and for the global economy.
This is how we move faster and smarter. Getting alternative fuels right from the start is not a constraint on the energy transition, but one of its greatest enablers.
