Latest news with #RhodiumGroup
Forbes
12 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
One Big Beautiful Bill – The Cost Of Climate Inaction
Storm cloud The One Big Beautiful Bill, signed into law in early July, directly rolls back several core provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, widely regarded as the most ambitious U.S. climate policy to date. According to Rhodium Group, the bill could cut the build-out of new clean power capacity by 53–59% between 2025 and 2035 and put over $500 billion in clean energy and transportation investments at risk. As the rollback of U.S. climate provisions accelerate, we may one day look back and ask: what was the true price of that decision? Not politically. Not ideologically. But economically. While the scale of the required investments might be daunting, the alternative – climate inaction – would unleash economic and societal damage on a far larger scale. Some of which we are already seeing now. The Price Tag Of Transition: High, But Necessary There's no denying that the global energy transition will require unprecedented levels of investment. According to the IEA, annual investment in renewables must double, and investment in energy efficiency and electrification needs to almost triple within five years, in order to meet global climate targets and support the clean energy tripling goal by 2030 agreed at COP28. Reaching net zero by 2050 will require annual global clean energy investments to rise to $4.5 trillion by the end of this decade. These numbers may seem overwhelming, however much of the spending replaces existing investment needs. Energy systems, transport networks, buildings, and industrial facilities all need ongoing reinvestment – whether it's for clean systems or fossil-based ones. In fact, in 2025 alone, $1.1 trillion is still expected to flow into oil, gas, and coal globally. So, the question isn't whether we invest, but where we direct those investments. TOPSHOT - Electric energy generating wind turbines are seen on a wind farm in the San Gorgonio Pass ... More area on Earth Day, April 22, 2016, near Palm Springs, California. - San Gorgonio Pass is one of the largest wind farm areas in the United States. (Photo by David McNew / AFP) (Photo credit should read DAVID MCNEW/AFP via Getty Images) Each $1 In Climate Action Can Save Up To $14 In Future Damages More importantly, the upfront cost of climate action must be weighed against the immense losses it can avert. According to joint modelling by the University of Cambridge and Boston Consulting Group, investments in mitigation and adaptation of 1-2% of cumulative global GDP from 2025 to 2100 could avoid economic damages worth between 11-27% of cumulative global GDP over the same period. In other words, each dollar spent on climate action could prevent up to 14 dollars in future damages. Failure to act could mean losing up to 25% of future global GDP – three times the total health spending worldwide this century. Even achieving a trajectory below 2°C would not eliminate damage altogether. However, this would limit losses to 2–4% of global GDP, which is much less than the 15–34% expected if temperatures were to rise by 3°C. That represents a permanent drag on global growth, magnified over time by compounding shocks and growing volatility. These losses are not limited to immediate effects from extreme weather events but also include the knock-on effects of climate disruption: lower labor productivity due to heat stress, water scarcity undermining food and energy systems, rising sea levels and droughts forcing mass migration, higher mortality and disease burdens straining healthcare systems, destabilized trade routes, and mounting costs for governments, businesses and customers alike. Iceberg - Hidden Danger And Global Warming Concept - 3d Illustration Climate Change Is Already Here – And Expensive For some, it may be tempting to see these economic impacts as hypothetical – problems for future generations to solve. But that framing is outdated: the losses are already real and increasing. Since the beginning of the century, climate-related disasters have caused over $3.6 trillion in damage globally. And the pace is accelerating. The economic cost of climate-related disasters has more than doubled since the early 2000s: from around $450 billion between 2000 and 2004 to over $1 trillion between 2020 and 2024. In 2023, global insured losses from climate-related events exceeded $100 billion for the fifth consecutive year. In Europe, recent years have brought a series of record-breaking climate events. In Spain for example, this summer has already brought extreme heat, with temperatures exceeding 46°C. The prolonged heatwave triggered wildfires, power outages, hospital surges, and significant agricultural losses – with economic damages in Spain alone estimated at 1.4% of GDP. The United States has had to cope with similar impacts. Estimates for Hurricane Helene, which devastated southeastern U.S. states in September 2024, suggest that this single event could be responsible for over $100 billion in damages, making it one of the costliest hurricanes in U.S. history. These are not one-off events. They are early signals of what's to come. As global temperatures continue to rise, the frequency and intensity of such disasters is projected to increase dramatically. You don't have to be an economist to grasp where this is heading – and what it will cost. 24 August 2023, Spain, Vinuela: Vegetation makes its way through the drought-ridden earth on the ... More shores of the Viñuela reservoir. The reservoir feeds the tropical crops of Axarquía, such as mangoes and avocados. It is in a phase of desiccation, with no water inflow, but consumption that has led the municipalities of Málaga to impose restrictions on the consumption of drinking water. Photo: Felipe Passolas/dpa (Photo by Felipe Passolas/picture alliance via Getty Images) Climate Action Could Create 85 Million New Jobs by 2030 Yet the argument for climate action extends well beyond cost avoidance. Investments in clean energy yield returns through lower utility costs, increased efficiency, and greater energy independence. The cost of key low-carbon technologies has fallen significantly over the past decade –especially solar power, wind, and batteries – and are expected to decline even further, while the margins that can be made with these technologies on energy markets are promising. Additionally, climate resilience investments tend to generate strong economic returns. According to the World Economic Forum, companies that assess their climate risks and act on them report paybacks of $2 to $19 for every dollar invested, depending on the sector. From flood defenses to water-saving systems, climate adaptation investments regularly deliver returns that outweigh their initial costs. The employment gains are equally compelling. The International Renewable Energy Agency estimated that 85 million new jobs could be created by 2030 in the clean energy transition. This exceeds the 12 million jobs expected to be lost in fossil fuel industries. In a nutshell, investing in cleantech has economic potential. LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - APRIL 21: Workers install solar panels during the completion phase of a ... More 4-acre solar rooftop atop AltaSea's research and development facility at the Port of Los Angeles, in the San Pedro neighborhood, on April 21, 2023 in Los Angeles, California. The installation will supply enough energy to power AltaSea's 35-acre campus, the country's biggest 'blue economy' tech hub, which is focused on clean oceans, climate resiliency, and clean energy. (Photo by) Inaction Is Not An Option Unmitigated climate change threatens the very pillars of economic stability. It would reduce productivity, increase poverty, and push fragile systems past their limits. The investment case for climate action is clear: it is a fraction of the cost of inaction, it unlocks long-term savings, and it creates new jobs and industries. The missing ingredient is no longer data or models, but political will, courageous companies and financial mobilization at scale. We face a choice: invest now in a cleaner, resilient future – or spend endlessly on the fallout of inaction.
The Hill
21-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Megabill takes a bite out of US climate progress
Models of the legislation that have emerged in recent weeks show U.S. emissions will rise as a result of its implementation. One model from climate think tank C2ES found U.S. emissions will increase by 8 percent more than they would have been otherwise as a result of the package. 'An 8 percent increase in our emissions is … still a massive amount of emissions,' said Brad Townsend, the group's vice president for policy and outreach. Taking into account all of the efforts to reduce U.S. emissions over the last 20 years, Townsend said, the bill represents 'rolling back a third of that progress with a stroke of a pen.' The Trump-backed measure both repeals spending aimed atreducing emissions that had been passed by Democrats and creates more opportunities for planet-warming fossil fuels. A refresher: Its most significant provisions repeal tax credits for climate-friendly energy technologies, including wind and solar energy, as well as electric vehicles. It also repeals programs that would have paid for low-carbon and anti-pollution projects, including in underserved neighborhoods. It includes tax breaks for oil, gas and coal and opens up more opportunities to drill on public lands and offshore. A model from Princeton University finds that without the 'big, beautiful bill,' the U.S. would cut its planet-heating emissions by 32 percent by 2035. With the bill, emissions are expected to only drop by 25 percent compared to where they were in 2005. If Biden-era policies remained in place, including not only the tax credits but also regulations, emissions would drop between 40 percent and 44 percent, the model finds. A model from the Rhodium Group found that without the bill, emissions would be 31 percent to 51 percent lower in 2035 when compared to 2005. Now, they'll only drop by between 27 percent and 44 percent during that period. Ben King, the lead author of the analysis, said this is a 'pretty substantial difference' — saying it's about 575 million extra metric tons of carbon dioxide in the year 2035 alone. That's the equivalent of putting an additional 134 million gas-powered cars on the road for a year.
The Hill
21-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Trump bill takes a ‘big, beautiful' bite out of US climate progress
The ' big, beautiful bill ' is expected to make a major dent in the U.S.'s climate progress, adding significantly more planet-warming emissions to the atmosphere. Models of the legislation that have emerged since its passage earlier this month show that U.S. emissions will rise as a result of its implementation. One from climate think tank C2ES found that U.S. emissions will be 8 percent more than they would have been otherwise as a result of the package. 'An 8% increase in our emissions is … still a massive amount of emissions,' said Brad Townsend, the group's vice president for policy and outreach. Townsend said that taking into account all of the efforts to reduce U.S. emissions over the last 20 years, the bill represents 'rolling back a third of that progress with a stroke of a pen.' 'From an emissions perspective, this bill is a disaster,' he said. The Trump-backed measure both repeals spending aimed at reducing emissions that had been passed by Democrats and creates more opportunities for planet-warming fossil fuels. Its most significant provisions repeal tax credits for climate-friendly energy technologies including wind and solar energy, as well as electric vehicles. These tax credits in particular were considered a massive step toward reducing emissions when they passed in 2022 as part of the Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act. It also repeals programs that would have paid for low-carbon and anti-pollution projects, including in underserved neighborhoods. On fossil fuels, the legislation includes tax breaks for oil, gas and coal and opens up more opportunities to drill on public lands and offshore. Since President Trump signed the bill on July 4, several models have indicated that provisions such as these will take a bite out of efforts to reduce U.S. emissions. One model, from Princeton University, finds that without the 'big, beautiful bill' the U.S. would cut its planet-heating emissions by 32 percent by 2035. With the bill, emissions are expected to only drop by 25 percent compared to where they were in 2005. If Biden-era policies remained in place, including not only the tax credits but also regulations, emissions would drop between 40 and 44 percent, the model finds. A slightly more optimistic model from the Rhodium Group found that without the bill, emissions would be 31 percent to 51 percent lower in 2035 when compared to 2005. Now, they'll only drop by between 27 and 44 percent during that period. Ben King, the lead author of the analysis, said that this is a 'pretty substantial difference' — saying it's about 575 million extra metric tons of carbon dioxide in the year 2035 alone. That's the equivalent of putting an additional 134 million gas-powered cars on the road for a year. The model projects that as a result of the bill, the number of new green energy projects on the grid between 2025 and 2035 will be 53-59 percent lower than it otherwise would have been. The Biden administration set a goal of cutting U.S. emissions by at least half by 2030. The Trump administration has not set its own climate goals, and the president has repeatedly downplayed the impacts of climate change and sought to bolster planet-warming fossil fuels. Climate change refers to the heating of the Earth's atmosphere, which is driven by human activities including fossil fuels and agriculture. This phenomenon makes extreme weather more frequent and intense. Over the past few decades, U.S. emissions have been declining amid a shift away from coal-fired power. The bill passed around the same time that the U.S. is seeing instances of extreme weather including recent heat waves and devastating flooding that has killed more than 130 people in Texas. While the U.S. is just one country, King noted that 'every extra ton of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere has some impact on the likelihood of extreme weather.'
Yahoo
15-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Illinois clean energy hit hard by Trump's ‘big, beautiful' tax bill: ‘An incredibly damaging blow'
Already the calls are coming in at Chicago's All Bright Solar. Customers want solar roofs installed on their homes — and they want them before a federal tax credit worth about $8,000 expires at the end of the year. The repeal of that tax credit under President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is 'pretty catastrophic' for residential solar, according to All Bright owner Lisa Albrecht, who expects demand to fall sharply. 'I've been on the 'solar-coaster' for a long time, and this is the roughest ride,' said Albrecht, using a term for the dramatic highs and lows of the industry. 'I'm definitely white-knuckling it. (Illinois) will lose jobs. We will lose installers.' Residential solar is particularly hard hit, but the president's far-reaching budget bill, signed July 4, has dealt a mighty blow to Illinois' clean energy overall, ending a tax credit of up to $7,500 for electric vehicle buyers, reducing access to tax credits for battery and solar panel manufacturers, slowing the construction of wind and solar farms and leaving $14 billion of announced clean energy investment statewide at higher risk for cancelation or downsizing. Under the bill, Illinois will see about 30% to 60% less clean power added to the grid by 2035, according to an analysis of a similar scenario by the Rhodium Group, a financial research firm. The firm also found that there would be about 16% to 38% fewer electric vehicles on the road nationwide in 2035. 'This bill goes after the very foundation of a clean energy economy, and tips the scales toward fossil fuels instead. So it is an incredibly damaging blow to the clean energy transition … it will severely curtail deployment,' said Julie McNamara, the associate policy director for climate and energy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Still, she said, clean energy deployment will continue: 'It will just come slower than it could and should have, and at higher cost.' The bill comes at a time of growing concern about climate change, which is caused mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and increases the likelihood of extreme weather events such as severe floods, multiyear droughts, record-breaking heat waves and raging wildfires. Illinois clean energy supporters bemoaned what's essentially the rollback of President Joe Biden's landmark climate bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, which Trump has labeled the 'green new scam' and targeted from the first days of his administration. But even as they were licking their wounds, the state's clean energy advocates were looking to the future. Clean energy companies, environmentalists and trade associations are all now very focused on what can be done on a state level, said Jon Carson, founder and managing partner at Trajectory Energy Partners, a solar development company in Highland Park. 'It's very clear to me that this will only amplify Illinois' leadership role in driving clean energy forward,' he said. Environmentalists and the clean energy industry had already been pushing for a new Illinois clean energy law, with provisions such as an ambitious new goal for large-scale energy storage, in which giant batteries absorb wind and solar energy when it's not needed, and release it when it is. Trump, a strong supporter of fossil fuels, has pressed for the repeal of Biden's climate bill on the grounds that it unfairly favored some forms of energy over others. 'For too long, the Federal Government has forced American taxpayers to subsidize expensive and unreliable energy sources like wind and solar,' Trump said in a July 7 executive order on the implementation of the One Big Beautiful Bill. '… Ending the massive cost of taxpayer handouts to unreliable energy sources is vital to energy dominance, national security, economic growth, and the fiscal health of the Nation.' Large solar farms and onshore wind are the most cost-effective forms of new-build energy generation, even without tax subsidies, according to a 2025 report from the financial firm Lazard. Wind and solar farms don't run as constantly as gas or coal plants, but solutions such as battery storage can help produce a steadier and more predictable flow of electricity. In the aftermath of the Trump bill, Illinois clean energy has an advantage; it still benefits from the state's own ambitious climate law, the 2021 Climate and Equitable Jobs Act, a signature achievement for Gov. JB Pritzker. The law sets a goal of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045. Illinois has annual targets for wind and solar energy, and requires the utilities ComEd, Ameren Illinois and MidAmerican Energy to purchase increasing amounts of clean electricity. The state has an incentive for residential solar customers that's worth nearly as much as the federal tax credit. And there's a state rebate for electric vehicles of up to $4,000. Illinois is expected to see a smaller reduction in new clean energy under the Trump bill than the nation as a whole, according to the Rhodium Group. The 30% to 60% less clean power that will be added here by 2035 compares with 57% to 72% less nationwide, according to Ben King, a director in the firm's climate and energy practice. 'Part of that is just that Illinois is a great place to build wind, particularly downstate, and the economics of that are favorable in some cases, even without the tax credits,' King said. But he added that Illinois' clean energy policies also provide 'guardrails' that protect the state from some of the impact of the Trump bill. The Trump bill is expected to increase planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, according to an analysis by Princeton's REPEAT project, which found the U.S. would emit roughly 470 million additional metric tons per year in 2035. For comparison, 470 million metric tons is more than twice Illinois' current annual greenhouse gas emissions. The bill is also expected to cost Illinois jobs, with 21,000 fewer people employed in 2030, according to Dan O'Brien, a senior analyst at Energy Innovation, a nonpartisan energy and climate policy think tank. With the bill in place, the annual energy cost per household nationwide will be $170 higher in 2035, according to the think tank. 'We (will) lose a lot of low-cost renewables that are pushing prices down for household consumers as well as commercial businesses and industries,' O'Brien said. 'So as a result of the bill, we're likely to see pretty steep increases in the costs for people like you and me.' King noted that $14 billion in clean energy investments — for manufacturing and utility-scale wind and solar — have been announced in Illinois but have not yet come online. 'A lot of that investment has been put at risk because of the changes in this bill,' he said. Among those who want to respond to the Trump bill with strong state action is Jen Walling, executive director of the Illinois Environmental Council, which advocates for more than 100 organizations. Illinois environmentalists have been pushing for the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act, which would expand energy efficiency in Illinois and encourage renewable energy projects. Walling said she wants the state to prioritize the addition of new transmission — the system, including high-voltage wires, that carries electricity across long distances. With more transmission, it's faster and easier to add solar and wind projects to the electric grid. Large battery arrays, which store energy from wind and solar farms and help make them more efficient, are also a priority, she said. The Illinois legislature made progress on a wide-ranging clean energy bill in the spring, and Walling would like to see that work continue when lawmakers return in the fall. 'We have a big, beautiful bill that we need to get done,' she said. nschoenberg@
Chicago Tribune
15-07-2025
- Business
- Chicago Tribune
Illinois clean energy hit hard by Trump's ‘big, beautiful' tax bill: ‘An incredibly damaging blow'
Already the calls are coming in at Chicago's All Bright Solar. Customers want solar roofs installed on their homes — and they want them before a federal tax credit worth about $8,000 expires at the end of the year. The repeal of that tax credit under President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is 'pretty catastrophic' for residential solar, according to All Bright owner Lisa Albrecht, who expects demand to fall sharply. 'I've been on the 'solar-coaster' for a long time, and this is the roughest ride,' said Albrecht, using a term for the dramatic highs and lows of the industry. 'I'm definitely white-knuckling it. (Illinois) will lose jobs. We will lose installers.' Residential solar is particularly hard hit, but the president's far-reaching budget bill, signed July 4, has dealt a mighty blow to Illinois' clean energy overall, ending a tax credit of up to $7,500 for electric vehicle buyers, reducing access to tax credits for battery and solar panel manufacturers, slowing the construction of wind and solar farms and leaving $14 billion of announced clean energy investment statewide at higher risk for cancelation or downsizing. Under the bill, Illinois will see about 30% to 60% less clean power added to the grid by 2035, according to an analysis of a similar scenario by the Rhodium Group, a financial research firm. The firm also found that there would be about 16% to 38% fewer electric vehicles on the road nationwide in 2035. 'This bill goes after the very foundation of a clean energy economy, and tips the scales toward fossil fuels instead. So it is an incredibly damaging blow to the clean energy transition … it will severely curtail deployment,' said Julie McNamara, the associate policy director for climate and energy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Still, she said, clean energy deployment will continue: 'It will just come slower than it could and should have, and at higher cost.' The bill comes at a time of growing concern about climate change, which is caused mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and increases the likelihood of extreme weather events such as severe floods, multiyear droughts, record-breaking heat waves and raging wildfires. Illinois clean energy supporters bemoaned what's essentially the rollback of President Joe Biden's landmark climate bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, which Trump has labeled the 'green new scam' and targeted from the first days of his administration. But even as they were licking their wounds, the state's clean energy advocates were looking to the future. Clean energy companies, environmentalists and trade associations are all now very focused on what can be done on a state level, said Jon Carson, founder and managing partner at Trajectory Energy Partners, a solar development company in Highland Park. 'It's very clear to me that this will only amplify Illinois' leadership role in driving clean energy forward,' he said. Environmentalists and the clean energy industry had already been pushing for a new Illinois clean energy law, with provisions such as an ambitious new goal for large-scale energy storage, in which giant batteries absorb wind and solar energy when it's not needed, and release it when it is. Trump, a strong supporter of fossil fuels, has pressed for the repeal of Biden's climate bill on the grounds that it unfairly favored some forms of energy over others. 'For too long, the Federal Government has forced American taxpayers to subsidize expensive and unreliable energy sources like wind and solar,' Trump said in a July 7 executive order on the implementation of the One Big Beautiful Bill. '… Ending the massive cost of taxpayer handouts to unreliable energy sources is vital to energy dominance, national security, economic growth, and the fiscal health of the Nation.' Large solar farms and onshore wind are the most cost-effective forms of new-build energy generation, even without tax subsidies, according to a 2025 report from the financial firm Lazard. Wind and solar farms don't run as constantly as gas or coal plants, but solutions such as battery storage can help produce a steadier and more predictable flow of electricity. In the aftermath of the Trump bill, Illinois clean energy has an advantage; it still benefits from the state's own ambitious climate law, the 2021 Climate and Equitable Jobs Act, a signature achievement for Gov. JB Pritzker. The law sets a goal of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045. Illinois has annual targets for wind and solar energy, and requires the utilities ComEd, Ameren Illinois and MidAmerican Energy to purchase increasing amounts of clean electricity. The state has an incentive for residential solar customers that's worth nearly as much as the federal tax credit. And there's a state rebate for electric vehicles of up to $4,000. Illinois is expected to see a smaller reduction in new clean energy under the Trump bill than the nation as a whole, according to the Rhodium Group. The 30% to 60% less clean power that will be added here by 2035 compares with 57% to 72% less nationwide, according to Ben King, a director in the firm's climate and energy practice. 'Part of that is just that Illinois is a great place to build wind, particularly downstate, and the economics of that are favorable in some cases, even without the tax credits,' King said. But he added that Illinois' clean energy policies also provide 'guardrails' that protect the state from some of the impact of the Trump bill. The Trump bill is expected to increase planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, according to an analysis by Princeton's REPEAT project, which found the U.S. would emit roughly 470 million additional metric tons per year in 2035. For comparison, 470 million metric tons is more than twice Illinois' current annual greenhouse gas emissions. The bill is also expected to cost Illinois jobs, with 21,000 fewer people employed in 2030, according to Dan O'Brien, a senior analyst at Energy Innovation, a nonpartisan energy and climate policy think tank. With the bill in place, the annual energy cost per household nationwide will be $170 higher in 2035, according to the think tank. 'We (will) lose a lot of low-cost renewables that are pushing prices down for household consumers as well as commercial businesses and industries,' O'Brien said. 'So as a result of the bill, we're likely to see pretty steep increases in the costs for people like you and me.' King noted that $14 billion in clean energy investments — for manufacturing and utility-scale wind and solar — have been announced in Illinois but have not yet come online. 'A lot of that investment has been put at risk because of the changes in this bill,' he said. Among those who want to respond to the Trump bill with strong state action is Jen Walling, executive director of the Illinois Environmental Council, which advocates for more than 100 organizations. Illinois environmentalists have been pushing for the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act, which would expand energy efficiency in Illinois and encourage renewable energy projects. Walling said she wants the state to prioritize the addition of new transmission — the system, including high-voltage wires, that carries electricity across long distances. With more transmission, it's faster and easier to add solar and wind projects to the electric grid. Large battery arrays, which store energy from wind and solar farms and help make them more efficient, are also a priority, she said. The Illinois legislature made progress on a wide-ranging clean energy bill in the spring, and Walling would like to see that work continue when lawmakers return in the fall. 'We have a big, beautiful bill that we need to get done,' she said.
