uri,href,identifier,attrs.Abstract,attrs.Author,attrs.DOI,attrs.ISSN,attrs.Issue,attrs.Journal,attrs.Pages,attrs.Title,attrs.Volume,attrs.Year,attrs._record_number,attrs._uuid,attrs.reftype,child_publication
/reference/119864b3-e23d-4021-86d5-e4fccb0385ae,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/119864b3-e23d-4021-86d5-e4fccb0385ae,119864b3-e23d-4021-86d5-e4fccb0385ae,"We compare life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from several light-duty passenger gasoline and plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) across US counties by accounting for regional differences due to marginal grid mix, ambient temperature, patterns of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and driving conditions (city versus highway). We find that PEVs can have larger or smaller carbon footprints than gasoline vehicles, depending on these regional factors and the specific vehicle models being compared. The Nissan Leaf battery electric vehicle has a smaller carbon footprint than the most efficient gasoline vehicle (the Toyota Prius) in the urban counties of California, Texas and Florida, whereas the Prius has a smaller carbon footprint in the Midwest and the South. The Leaf is lower emitting than the Mazda 3 conventional gasoline vehicle in most urban counties, but the Mazda 3 is lower emitting in rural Midwest counties. The Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid electric vehicle has a larger carbon footprint than the Prius throughout the continental US, though the Volt has a smaller carbon footprint than the Mazda 3 in many urban counties. Regional grid mix, temperature, driving conditions, and vehicle model all have substantial implications for identifying which technology has the lowest carbon footprint, whereas regional patterns of VMT have a much smaller effect. Given the variation in relative GHG implications, it is unlikely that blunt policy instruments that favor specific technology categories can ensure emission reductions universally.","Yuksel, Tugce; Mili-Ann M. Tamayao; Chris Hendrickson; Inês M. L. Azevedo; Jeremy J. Michalek",10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/044007,1748-9326,4,"Environmental Research Letters",044007,"Effect of regional grid mix, driving patterns and climate on the comparative carbon footprint of gasoline and plug-in electric vehicles in the United States",11,2016,24456,119864b3-e23d-4021-86d5-e4fccb0385ae,"Journal Article",/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/044007
/reference/12892612-06cb-4b04-86fa-b88ae37dc766,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/12892612-06cb-4b04-86fa-b88ae37dc766,12892612-06cb-4b04-86fa-b88ae37dc766,,"Executive Office of the President,",,,,,,"Executive Order 13783: Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth",,2017,24514,12892612-06cb-4b04-86fa-b88ae37dc766,"Press Release",/generic/416c4015-89dc-41e6-9284-8b17476ab06b
/reference/141185af-76a0-4f8b-9902-82b546a3b27b,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/141185af-76a0-4f8b-9902-82b546a3b27b,141185af-76a0-4f8b-9902-82b546a3b27b,,"Heeter, Jenny; Jeffrey J. Cook; Lori Bird",,,,,43,"Charting the Emergence of Corporate Procurement of Utility-Scale PV",,2017,25221,141185af-76a0-4f8b-9902-82b546a3b27b,Report,/report/charting-emergence-corporate-procurement-utility-scale-pv
/reference/37f81db2-5010-4e7d-a9df-f5caaaa29879,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/37f81db2-5010-4e7d-a9df-f5caaaa29879,37f81db2-5010-4e7d-a9df-f5caaaa29879,,"Aldy, Joseph E.",10.1080/00963402.2017.1388673,0096-3402,6,"Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists",376-381,"Real world headwinds for Trump climate change policy",73,2017,25191,37f81db2-5010-4e7d-a9df-f5caaaa29879,"Journal Article",/article/10.1080/00963402.2017.1388673
/reference/417ea095-d99e-4ef2-bc70-945c34a2596d,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/417ea095-d99e-4ef2-bc70-945c34a2596d,417ea095-d99e-4ef2-bc70-945c34a2596d,,"Ahluwalia, Manjyot Bhan",,,,,39,"The business of pricing carbon: How companies are pricing carbon to mitigate risks and prepare for a Low-Carbon future",,2017,25211,417ea095-d99e-4ef2-bc70-945c34a2596d,Report,/report/business-pricing-carbon-how-companies-are-pricing-carbon-mitigate-risks-prepare-low-carbon-future
/reference/46cee5f3-4325-4e5e-ac7f-012325111ba1,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/46cee5f3-4325-4e5e-ac7f-012325111ba1,46cee5f3-4325-4e5e-ac7f-012325111ba1,,"NACUBO,",,,,,15,"Higher Education: Leading the Nation to a Safe and Secure Energy Future",,2012,25226,46cee5f3-4325-4e5e-ac7f-012325111ba1,Report,/report/higher-education-leading-nation-safe-secure-energy-future
/reference/47f855e2-eed7-4027-bedd-22313d13319e,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/47f855e2-eed7-4027-bedd-22313d13319e,47f855e2-eed7-4027-bedd-22313d13319e,,"CDP,",,,,,,"CDP web site",,2017,24508,47f855e2-eed7-4027-bedd-22313d13319e,"Web Page",/webpage/9be739eb-a029-4767-9e6c-c6584298e933
/reference/7225530f-0579-4a4b-a1b3-bd1fa9ae55d2,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/7225530f-0579-4a4b-a1b3-bd1fa9ae55d2,7225530f-0579-4a4b-a1b3-bd1fa9ae55d2,,"The World Bank,",,,,,,"Carbon pricing dashboard [web tool]",,2018,25227,7225530f-0579-4a4b-a1b3-bd1fa9ae55d2,"Web Page",/webpage/26626297-9b7b-45b7-8262-1770cfcfeeb8
/reference/7f4ecc6c-69e5-4866-9fac-a5c7e531f3e1,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/7f4ecc6c-69e5-4866-9fac-a5c7e531f3e1,7f4ecc6c-69e5-4866-9fac-a5c7e531f3e1,"Renewable portfolio standards (RPS) exist in 29 US states and the District of Columbia. This article summarizes the first national-level, integrated assessment of the future costs and benefits of existing RPS policies; the same metrics are evaluated under a second scenario in which widespread expansion of these policies is assumed to occur. Depending on assumptions about renewable energy technology advancement and natural gas prices, existing RPS policies increase electric system costs by as much as $31 billion, on a present-value basis over 2015−2050. The expanded renewable deployment scenario yields incremental costs that range from $23 billion to $194 billion, depending on the assumptions employed. The monetized value of improved air quality and reduced climate damages exceed these costs. Using central assumptions, existing RPS policies yield $97 billion in air-pollution health benefits and $161 billion in climate damage reductions. Under the expanded RPS case, health benefits total $558 billion and climate benefits equal $599 billion. These scenarios also yield benefits in the form of reduced water use. RPS programs are not likely to represent the most cost effective path towards achieving air quality and climate benefits. Nonetheless, the findings suggest that US RPS programs are, on a national basis, cost effective when considering externalities.","Wiser, Ryan; Trieu Mai; Dev Millstein; Galen Barbose; Lori Bird; Jenny Heeter; David Keyser; Venkat Krishnan; Jordan Macknick",10.1088/1748-9326/aa87bd,1748-9326,9,"Environmental Research Letters",094023,"Assessing the costs and benefits of US renewable portfolio standards",12,2017,25208,7f4ecc6c-69e5-4866-9fac-a5c7e531f3e1,"Journal Article",/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa87bd
/reference/8ae1bf4d-4ea5-4c70-91bd-a1b7e3cc17fa,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/8ae1bf4d-4ea5-4c70-91bd-a1b7e3cc17fa,8ae1bf4d-4ea5-4c70-91bd-a1b7e3cc17fa,,"DSIRE,",,,,,,"Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE) [online tool]",,2017,24510,8ae1bf4d-4ea5-4c70-91bd-a1b7e3cc17fa,"Web Page",/webpage/6462dff7-6d71-4e59-99c2-d125a9e88d2e
/reference/ba372d89-ab64-4112-9d48-76f8f323c232,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/ba372d89-ab64-4112-9d48-76f8f323c232,ba372d89-ab64-4112-9d48-76f8f323c232,,"Second Nature,",,,,,,"Second Nature Reporting Platform [web tool]",,2018,25225,ba372d89-ab64-4112-9d48-76f8f323c232,"Web Page",/webpage/5faee3e3-2544-4418-b407-e77827760c7a
/reference/c9761a3e-37aa-4cfb-8d17-1e3f01ee836b,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/c9761a3e-37aa-4cfb-8d17-1e3f01ee836b,c9761a3e-37aa-4cfb-8d17-1e3f01ee836b,,"Barbose, Galen L.",,,,,,"U.S. Renewables Portfolio Standards 2016 Annual Status Report",,2016,24501,c9761a3e-37aa-4cfb-8d17-1e3f01ee836b,Report,/report/us-renewables-portfolio-standards-2016-annual-status-report
/reference/d6eb34ef-1bfb-4b90-a397-f6bb363086a0,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/d6eb34ef-1bfb-4b90-a397-f6bb363086a0,d6eb34ef-1bfb-4b90-a397-f6bb363086a0,"A number of knowledge gaps and research priorities emerged during the third US National Climate Assessment (NCA3). Several are also gaps in the latest IPCC WG2 report. These omissions reflect major gaps in the underlying research base from which these assessments draw. These include the challenge of estimating the costs and benefits of climate change impacts and responses to climate change and the need for research on climate impacts on important sectors such as manufacturing and services. Climate impacts also need to be assessed within an international context in an increasingly connected and globalized world. Climate change is being experienced not only through changes within a locality but also through the impacts of climate change in other regions connected through trade, prices, and commodity chains, migratory species, human mobility and networked communications. Also under-researched are the connections and tradeoffs between responses to climate change at or across different scales, especially between adaptation and mitigation or between climate responses and other environmental and social policies. This paper discusses some of these research priorities, illustrating their significance through analysis of economic and international connections and case studies of responses to climate change. It also critically reflects on the process of developing research needs as part of the assessment process.","Liverman, Diana",10.1007/s10584-015-1464-5,1573-1480,1,"Climatic Change",173-186,"U.S. national climate assessment gaps and research needs: Overview, the economy and the international context",135,2016,22064,d6eb34ef-1bfb-4b90-a397-f6bb363086a0,"Journal Article",/article/10.1007/s10584-015-1464-5
/reference/f0b1dfab-0930-41b3-a780-e50b5887802a,https://data.globalchange.gov/reference/f0b1dfab-0930-41b3-a780-e50b5887802a,f0b1dfab-0930-41b3-a780-e50b5887802a,,"DOE-EPSA,",,,,,43,"Energy CO2 Emissions Impacts of Clean Energy Technology Innovation and Policy",,2017,25218,f0b1dfab-0930-41b3-a780-e50b5887802a,Report,/report/energy-co2-emissions-impacts-clean-energy-technology-innovation-policy