20 calories of water, obviously

Fascinating interactive. Thanks.

My premiums shot up 43% this year (Raleigh, NC), after hikes of 20% and 24% the past two years. Home insurance premiums may be one of the most direct ways that many Americans experience the impacts of climate change that has already occurred.

At 50% above the necessary volume.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this!

Wrong person tagged! That’s not my timeline.

🤣

thanks for sharing this!

Lead author @gmmouat.bsky.social is on BlueSky! Follow this guy, post haste.

Cc: @paulijllo.bsky.social @katiehjordan.bsky.social @natcomms.nature.com

Both scenarios get us half way to net-zero and result in little difference in overall energy system cost (only +0.7% to pursue State Action).

Even with little expectation of federal climate action in the near-term, states can still achieve substantial and cost-effective emissions cuts.

So emissions sneaking across borders can undercut state-level climate action.

In the absence of federal leadership, net-zero states will need to consider the embedded carbon of their electricity and biofuel imports.

Transmission and interregional trade can lead to leakage.

Under State Action, the North Central region imports fossil-based electricity from the unconstrained Central region.

But under State Action, California increases electricity imports from the Southwest and spurs out-of-region renewables.

State-led action = more electrification.

Under State Action, we see more EVs, heat pumps, and electrified industry in participating states, requiring +900 TWh/year over National Action. But non-participating states retain a fair amount of natural gas and coal generation without a federal cap.

We modeled two scenarios using Temoa:
• State Action: net-zero by 2050 in 23 politically-willing states
• National Action: same CO₂-eq reduction but achieved with a nationwide cap

Both reduce emissions 46% by 2050, but with very different tech pathways.

cc: @iopp-environment.bsky.social

I feel like this headline should be from 2010. From my experience, nuclear is not remotely controversial with most current college students.

The paper offers much more detail into the technology choices and system-wide abatement costs. Check it out!

Thanks to @sloanfoundation.bsky.social, Environmental Research: Energy @ioppublishing.bsky.social, and collaborators (@paulijllo.bsky.social @clameron.bsky.social @katiehjordan.bsky.social)

Electrification (think heat pumps and EVs) decisions were optimized within the model and varied based on carbon cost. At $400/t—sufficient to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050—U.S. electricity generation more than doubles compared to today to most cost-effectively reduce emissions.