Connect with us

Published

on

Despite coal-power output in the US falling to its lowest level in nearly 60 years, the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions fell by just 0.2% in 2024, according to new research from the Rhodium Group

Increases in electricity demand and continued growth in transport emissions led to US emissions remaining broadly “unchanged”, while the economy grew by 2.7%, the New York-based research group finds.

The US is the world’s second-largest annual emitter, has very high per-capita emissions and by far the greatest historical responsibility for current warming.

Even though emissions remained unchanged from a year earlier, they were still 8% below pre-pandemic levels in 2024 and remained about 20% below 2005 levels, Rhodium notes.

While the pace of decarbonisation slowed in 2024, after a reduction of 1.9% in 2023, new policies and regulations introduced under the Biden administration were expected to see this accelerate in the coming years, Rhodium says. 

However, it notes that this progress could now be at risk from the incoming presidency of Donald Trump. Trump has repeatedly pledged to roll back a range of environmental policies brought in by his predecessor Joe Biden. 

Solar and wind overtake coal

Renewable energy in the US grew in 2024, with the combined output from solar and wind surpassing coal in the electricity mix for the first time ever, according to Rhodium.

Together, solar and wind made up 16% of the electricity mix in 2024, up nearly two percentage points from 2023. Solar generation grew by 32% and wind by 7%, both outpacing the 4% growth in gas generation, the report notes.

Solar had a record-setting year in 2024, accounting for 64% of all new electricity-generating capacity added to the US grid in Q3, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association.

However, the rollout of wind generation was hit by notable challenges, including increased costs and project siting difficulties.

Gas-fired electricity generation remained the single-largest source in the US by far, producing a record 1,782 terawatt hours (TWh) in 2024, some 43% of the total.

Nuclear was the second-largest, as shown in the figure below. It generated 781TWh, some 19% of the total, just ahead of the combined output of wind and solar, as well as coal.

The electricity generation mix in the US, showing gas, nuclear, combined solar and wind, coal, hydro and other sources in terawatt -hours, 2005-2024.
The electricity generation mix in the US, showing gas, nuclear, combined solar and wind, coal, hydro and other sources in terawatt -hours, 2005-2024. Source: Rhodium Group, EIA.

The growth of wind and solar helped ensure that the generation mix was “slightly cleaner” in 2024, even though demand for electricity rose by 3%, says Rhodium.

Buildings represented the biggest increase in demand for electricity, where a 10% growth in “cooling degree days” – a measure of how hot the temperature is – drove up summer electricity use. (The US saw record-breaking heatwaves across the year, with the summer of 2024 the hottest on record, the Guardian reported.)

After buildings, industry ranked second and commercial buildings third as the biggest sources of increased electricity demand.

There has been a lot of media focus on artificial intelligence (AI) driving electricity demand growth. Moreover, a Department of Energy-commissioned study in December found that US data centre power demand could nearly triple within four years, consuming as much as 12% of the country’s electricity by 2028.

However, Rhodium notes that data centres were only a small source of demand growth in 2024, representing just a fraction of the third biggest source of electricity demand.

In 2024, the additional power demand was met by gas, wind and solar, while coal continued to decline, dropping one percentage point to 16% of the electricity mix.

In absolute terms, coal provided as much power in 2024 as it did in 1967 when Lyndon Baines Johnson was the 36th president of the US, the Vietnam War was raging and Elvis Presley married Priscilla Ann Beaulieu in Las Vegas. 

Gas remained the single largest source of power in the US in 2024, accounting for 43% of the total (1 percentage point higher than in 2023), notes Rhodium.

This growth – to meet increased demand – offset the reduction in coal generation and emissions from the power sector increased by 0.2% (3m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, MtCO2e) in 2024.

Alongside the increase in renewable energy, the US saw record-high investment in the manufacturing and deployment of clean technologies last year, Rhodium says.

For example, investment in clean technologies accounted for 5% of total private investment in structures, equipment and durable consumer goods in the third quarter of last year, according to the latest data from the Clean Investment Monitor

Crude oil production was up by 2.4% in 2024, while gas production fell by 0.6%, according to Rhodium. This was a slightly bigger drop in gas production than in 2020 when the Covid pandemic hit, as producers reacted to lower prices by drilling fewer new wells and curtailing production, it adds.

The research estimates that oil and gas systems released around 10% less methane per unit of output in 2024 than in 2022, due to cleaner production practices as well as state and federal regulations.

As such, cleaning up oil and gas production led to a 3.7% drop in emissions from the sector, some 11MtCOe relative to 2023.

Hurricanes hit industrial emissions

Industrial emissions fell in 2024 due to low manufacturing output, Rhodium finds. Across the year, the sector’s emissions fell by 1.8%, or 22MtCO2e, from 2023.

Chemicals, computers and electronics, and paper production grew in 2024, but declines in food and beverages, mining and machinery offset these gains, it says.

This included historically low coal mining activity, which fell by 12% in 2024 to its lowest level in decades due to demand falling, as coal power plants retire and are replaced by renewables and gas, as noted in the section above.

One factor in declining industrial output was extreme weather. Along with the impact of labour disruption on production, Hurricanes Beryl, Milton and Helene also all hit manufacturing output, notes Rhodium. 

Transport remained the highest-emitting sector in the US, with a 0.8% increase in emissions driven by post-pandemic rebounds in jet fuel and petrol consumption, according to Rhodium.

Emissions from transport, industry and buildings have remained relatively steady in recent decades, whereas the power sector has seen steady declines, as shown in the figure below.

Emissions across key US sectors including transport, power, industry, buildings, agriculture and oil and gas show in million tonnes of CO2e
Emissions across key US sectors including transport, power, industry, buildings, agriculture and oil and gas show in million tonnes of CO2e. Source: Rhodium Group, EPA.

Available seat miles” – a metric used to quantify air travel – set a new record in 2024, up 6% year-on-year in the first three quarters of the year, according to Rhodium. 

There was also “record-high road activity” the report notes, with a 1% increase in road traffic volumes up to October. As such, petrol consumption increased, although diesel continued to fall, dropping close to 2020 levels.

Despite these increases in transportation activity, emissions from the sector still remain 2.%% below 2019 levels.

Building sector emissions increased by 0.4% due to elevated fuel use, Rhodium adds.

Looking ahead

The “modest 2024 decline underscores the urgency of accelerating decarbonisation in all sectors” concludes Rhodium, in particular with the imminent change in US government.

Currently, the US is not on track to meet either its 2030 Paris Agreement target of a 50-52% reduction in emissions relative to 2005 levels or its newly set 2035 goal of a 61-66% reduction. 

To bridge the gap between the current US trajectory and its stated goals would require an average emissions reduction of 7.6% every year from 2025 through to 2030, says Rhodium. This would be more than two-thirds of the drop seen as a result of Covid lockdowns in 2020.

US net emissions trajectory (2000-2025), highlighting the progression needed to reach the Copenhagen Accord and Paris Agreement climate targets.
US net emissions trajectory (2000-2025), highlighting the progression needed to reach the Copenhagen Accord and Paris Agreement climate targets. Source: Rhodium.

Analysts, including Rhodium, have predicted that the combined impact of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on vehicles and power plants will increase the pace of emissions reductions in the future. 

There is already some evidence of this, with the most recent data from Clean Investment Monitor suggesting that clean energy and transportation investment could reach a high of $71bn in the third quarter of 2024. 

This would cap the “nearly unbroken streak of quarter-on-quarter growth since the IRA’s passage, with clean investment now accounting for a record 5% of total US private investment”, notes Rhodium.

However, whether the rate of emissions reduction actually accelerates is heavily dependent on the extent to which the incoming Trump administration and the Republican Congress rollback and repeal EPA regulations and energy and tax policies brought in or expanded through the IRA.

Trump has repeatedly promised to pull back climate policies, saying in September 2024 that “to further defeat inflation, my plan will terminate the Green New Deal, which I call the Green New Scam” in reference to the IRA, according to Politico

In December, Rhoiodum published a separate piece of research dubbed: “Trump 2.0: What’s in Store for US Energy and Climate?” It explored a number of potential pathways the Trump administration could pursue when he takes office on 20 January, including one called “rollbacks and repeal”. 

This pathway would see the pace of US decarbonisation slow significantly, leaving emissions at 24-40% below 2005 levels in 2035. This is equivalent to roughly an additional 1bn tonnes of CO2e in 2035 in each emissions scenario explored by Rhodium.

Rolling back regulations alone could lead to a 270-470MtCO2e increase in emissions by 2035, it adds. This would represent 25-50% of the total emissions increase under the full “rollbacks and repeal” pathway.

Analysis by Carbon Brief in March 2024 found that Trump winning November’s presidential election could lead to a cumulative additional 4bn tonnes of US emissions by 2030, compared to under Bidens’s plans. 

Ben King, co-author of the preliminary emissions analysis and Trump 2.0 note, and an associate director in Rhodium Group’s energy and climate practice, tells Carbon Brief:

“It’s not clear what precise policy actions the Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress will take, but we analysed the potential impacts of two major policy changes: rolling back major climate regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and repealing the energy and tax policies that were enhanced and expanded through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Rolling back EPA climate regulations alone – which the Trump administration could pursue unilaterally, though not immediately – could increase greenhouse gas emissions by 270-470MtCO2e in 2035.

“A more extreme policy pathway, rolling back EPA regulations and immediately repealing the energy and tax components of the IRA – which would require congressional approval – could increase emissions by nearly 1GtCO2e in 2035.”

Rhodium concludes its analysis of the US’s emissions in 2024 by noting that it will be watching developments around ​​rolling back and repealing climate policies “closely”.

The post US emissions ‘unchanged’ in 2024 despite coal power at lowest level since 1967 appeared first on Carbon Brief.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/us-emissions-unchanged-in-2024-despite-coal-power-at-lowest-level-since-1967/

Continue Reading

Climate Change

DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report

Published

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed. 
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This week

Blazing heat hits Europe

FANNING THE FLAMES: Wildfires “fanned by a heatwave and strong winds” caused havoc across southern Europe, Reuters reported. It added: “Fire has affected nearly 440,000 hectares (1,700 square miles) in the eurozone so far in 2025, double the average for the same period of the year since 2006.” Extreme heat is “breaking temperature records across Europe”, the Guardian said, with several countries reporting readings of around 40C.

HUMAN TOLL: At least three people have died in the wildfires erupting across Spain, Turkey and Albania, France24 said, adding that the fires have “displaced thousands in Greece and Albania”. Le Monde reported that a child in Italy “died of heatstroke”, while thousands were evacuated from Spain and firefighters “battled three large wildfires” in Portugal.

UK WILDFIRE RISK: The UK saw temperatures as high as 33.4C this week as England “entered its fourth heatwave”, BBC News said. The high heat is causing “nationally significant” water shortfalls, it added, “hitting farms, damaging wildlife and increasing wildfires”. The Daily Mirror noted that these conditions “could last until mid-autumn”. Scientists warn the UK faces possible “firewaves” due to climate change, BBC News also reported.

Around the world

  • GRID PRESSURES: Iraq suffered a “near nationwide blackout” as elevated power demand – due to extreme temperatures of around 50C – triggered a transmission line failure, Bloomberg reported.
  • ‘DIRE’ DOWN UNDER: The Australian government is keeping a climate risk assessment that contains “dire” implications for the continent “under wraps”, the Australian Financial Review said.
  • EXTREME RAINFALL: Mexico City is “seeing one of its heaviest rainy seasons in years”, the Washington Post said. Downpours in the Japanese island of Kyushu “caused flooding and mudslides”, according to Politico. In Kashmir, flash floods killed 56 and left “scores missing”, the Associated Press said.
  • SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION: China and Brazil agreed to “ensure the success” of COP30 in a recent phone call, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.
  • PLASTIC ‘DEADLOCK’: Talks on a plastic pollution treaty have failed again at a summit in Geneva, according to the Guardian, with countries “deadlocked” on whether it should include “curbs on production and toxic chemicals”.

15

The number of times by which the most ethnically-diverse areas in England are more likely to experience extreme heat than its “least diverse” areas, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief.


Latest climate research

  • As many as 13 minerals critical for low-carbon energy may face shortages under 2C pathways | Nature Climate Change
  • A “scoping review” examined the impact of climate change on poor sexual and reproductive health and rights in sub-Saharan Africa | PLOS One
  • A UK university cut the carbon footprint of its weekly canteen menu by 31% “without students noticing” | Nature Food

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

Factchecking Trump’s climate report

A report commissioned by the US government to justify rolling back climate regulations contains “at least 100 false or misleading statements”, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists. The report, compiled in two months by five hand-picked researchers, inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed” and misleadingly states that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”80

Spotlight

Does Xi Jinping care about climate change?

This week, Carbon Brief unpacks new research on Chinese president Xi Jinping’s policy priorities.

On this day in 2005, Xi Jinping, a local official in eastern China, made an unplanned speech when touring a small village – a rare occurrence in China’s highly-choreographed political culture.

In it, he observed that “lucid waters and lush mountains are mountains of silver and gold” – that is, the environment cannot be sacrificed for the sake of growth.

(The full text of the speech is not available, although Xi discussed the concept in a brief newspaper column – see below – a few days later.)

In a time where most government officials were laser-focused on delivering economic growth, this message was highly unusual.

Forward-thinking on environment

As a local official in the early 2000s, Xi endorsed the concept of “green GDP”, which integrates the value of natural resources and the environment into GDP calculations.

He also penned a regular newspaper column, 22 of which discussed environmental protection – although “climate change” was never mentioned.

This focus carried over to China’s national agenda when Xi became president.

New research from the Asia Society Policy Institute tracked policies in which Xi is reported by state media to have “personally” taken action.

It found that environmental protection is one of six topics in which he is often said to have directly steered policymaking.

Such policies include guidelines to build a “Beautiful China”, the creation of an environmental protection inspection team and the “three-north shelterbelt” afforestation programme.

“It’s important to know what Xi’s priorities are because the top leader wields outsized influence in the Chinese political system,” Neil Thomas, Asia Society Policy Institute fellow and report co-author, told Carbon Brief.

Local policymakers are “more likely” to invest resources in addressing policies they know have Xi’s attention, to increase their chances for promotion, he added.

What about climate and energy?

However, the research noted, climate and energy policies have not been publicised as bearing Xi’s personal touch.

“I think Xi prioritises environmental protection more than climate change because reducing pollution is an issue of social stability,” Thomas said, noting that “smoggy skies and polluted rivers” were more visible and more likely to trigger civil society pushback than gradual temperature increases.

The paper also said topics might not be linked to Xi personally when they are “too technical” or “politically sensitive”.

For example, Xi’s landmark decision for China to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 is widely reported as having only been made after climate modelling – facilitated by former climate envoy Xie Zhenhua – showed that this goal was achievable.

Prior to this, Xi had never spoken publicly about carbon neutrality.

Prof Alex Wang, a University of California, Los Angeles professor of law not involved in the research, noted that emphasising Xi’s personal attention may signal “top” political priorities, but not necessarily Xi’s “personal interests”.

By not emphasising climate, he said, Xi may be trying to avoid “pushing the system to overprioritise climate to the exclusion of the other priorities”.

There are other ways to know where climate ranks on the policy agenda, Thomas noted:

“Climate watchers should look at what Xi says, what Xi does and what policies Xi authorises in the name of the ‘central committee’. Is Xi talking more about climate? Is Xi establishing institutions and convening meetings that focus on climate? Is climate becoming a more prominent theme in top-level documents?”

Watch, read, listen

TRUMP EFFECT: The Columbia Energy Exchange podcast examined how pressure from US tariffs could affect India’s clean energy transition.

NAMIBIAN ‘DESTRUCTION’: The National Observer investigated the failure to address “human rights abuses and environmental destruction” claims against a Canadian oil company in Namibia.

‘RED AI’: The Network for the Digital Economy and the Environment studied the state of current research on “Red AI”, or the “negative environmental implications of AI”.

Coming up

Pick of the jobs

DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

The post DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report appeared first on Carbon Brief.

DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report

Continue Reading

Climate Change

New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit

Published

on

The specter of a “gas-for-wind” compromise between the governor and the White House is drawing the ire of residents as a deadline looms.

Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied against new natural gas pipelines in their state as a deadline loomed for the public to comment on a revived proposal to expand the gas pipeline that supplies downstate New York.

New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims

Published

on

A “critical assessment” report commissioned by the Trump administration to justify a rollback of US climate regulations contains at least 100 false or misleading statements, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists.

The report – “A critical review of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the US climate” – was published by the US Department of Energy (DoE) on 23 July, just days before the government laid out plans to revoke a scientific finding used as the legal basis for emissions regulation.

The executive summary of the controversial report inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed”.

It also states misleadingly that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”.

Compiled in just two months by five “independent” researchers hand-selected by the climate-sceptic US secretary of energy Chris Wright, the document has sparked fierce criticism from climate scientists, who have pointed to factual errors, misrepresentation of research, messy citations and the cherry-picking of data.

Experts have also noted the authors’ track record of promoting views at odds with the mainstream understanding of climate science.

Wright’s department claims the report – which is currently open to public comment as part of a 30-day review – underwent an “internal peer-review period amongst [the] DoE’s scientific research community”.

The report is designed to provide a scientific underpinning to one flank of the Trump administration’s plans to rescind a finding that serves as the legal prerequisite for federal emissions regulation. (The second flank is about legal authority to regulate emissions.)

The “endangerment finding” – enacted by the Obama administration in 2009 – states that six greenhouse gases are contributing to the net-negative impacts of climate change and, thus, put the public in danger.

In a press release on 29 July, the US Environmental Protection Agency said “updated studies and information” set out in the new report would “challenge the assumptions” of the 2009 finding.

Carbon Brief asked a wide range of climate scientists, including those cited in the “critical review” itself, to factcheck the report’s various claims and statements.

The post Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims appeared first on Carbon Brief.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-trumps-climate-report-includes-more-than-100-false-or-misleading-claims/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com