Race to 100% Clean

Who is leading on climate action?

In the absence of federal action, states, municipalities, utilities, and corporations are making unprecedented commitments to take on the climate challenge. Since 2008, local and state commitments have led to a near-doubling of renewable energy generation in the United States. Five states, plus Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, are now committed by law to 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2050 or earlier (and another eight states have 100 percent goals). Twelve large utilities, nearly 140 cities, and more than 150 businesses have pledged to—or already have achieved—100 percent clean electricity or “net-zero” emissions.

Commitments to increase energy efficiency, which reduces the amount of generation we need to reach 100 percent clean electricity, have also ramped up: 26 states have passed Energy Efficiency Resource Standards (EERS) mandating that utilities develop programs to achieve a specific amount of annual energy savings; cities have implemented more than 265 initiatives to support efficient buildings and transportation since 2017; and U.S. utilities collectively spent $8 billion on energy efficiency programs in 2018, alone.

This interactive and explanatory Story Map provides a visual representation of the commitments that states, municipalities, utilities, and corporations have made to date. It also allows us to better understand who the leading climate actors are in the United States today and how their commitments could help our country meet the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the global threshold which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates will provide the best chance of avoiding catastrophic climate impacts.

Not all targets are created equal

Climate commitments vary significantly in structure and degree of ambition. It is important to recognize that not all targets are created equal. You can compare commitments and ambition by looking at: what resources are included as well as carve-outs or exceptions; the baseline year used as reference; how quickly the target must be met; whether it is required or voluntary; and what sectors must achieve the target.

Clean vs. renewable

While some commitments target “renewable energy,” the majority use the broader language of “clean energy.” The terms “renewable” and “clean” cannot be used interchangeably, as they often erroneously are, because the resources included in the definitions of each vary. In the story map, the definitions of “renewable” and “clean” are determined by each state.

• Renewable resources are most often defined as solar, wind, hydro, tidal, and geothermal power. Some states also include certain types of biomass and waste, such as gas captured from landfill or sewage treatment plants.

• Clean resources, also referred to as low-carbon, zero-carbon, or carbon-free, generally encompass these renewable resources. However, some also define ‘clean resources’ to include other technologies, like fossil fuels with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) or nuclear, which is emissions-free but carries a host of health and safety risks.

Some targets additionally use the language of “net-zero” or “carbon-neutral,” which refers to the removal of any remaining emissions through carbon offsetting investments or natural and technological carbon removal strategies, such as direct air capture.

Target years

The majority of states, cities, utilities, and businesses set target years by which to achieve their intended emissions-reduction or clean-electricity goals. With a few exceptions, most are aiming for 2040 or 2050. Whether entities can reach far-out targets is highly dependent on the stringency of their interim targets, which, in many cases, occur around 2030 and are critical to being well-positioned to achieve the long-term goals.

Baseline years

A baseline year is a reference point against which emission reductions are calculated and could make the difference between an ambitious target and a weak one. Because U.S. emissions peaked in 2007, an emissions reduction target using a baseline year of 2005 (the second-highest year on record) is weaker (because it sets a higher threshold) than the same target using a baseline year of 1990, 2010, or 2016, when emissions were lower.

Binding vs. Non-Binding Targets

NRDC categorizes these commitments into two policy buckets: binding legislation or regulation, and non-binding executive orders or goals.

• Binding legislation refers to laws with explicit targets as passed by a state legislature and signed by the governor. These are binding because they create obligations to achieve the target and penalties for failure to do so.

• Executive orders are directives signed, written, and published by a governor without legislative approval. They do not have the same force of law as legislation but can result in administrative rulemakings or other processes that can lead to binding regulations or to the development of plans to achieve the target. These orders, and sometimes the regulations that follow, can be overturned by future governors, and therefore risk being less permanent than legislative mandates. Non-binding goals can be in the form of legislation, executive order, or commitments by utilities or corporations, but only express the intent or the study of achieving specific targets, not requiring them.

Applicable sectors

Renewable energy development and emissions-reduction commitments often vary in the sectors they cover. The majority of cities (and many states and utilities) have made commitments for the electric power sector, which encompasses emissions produced by the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity needed to meet consumption demands. Economy-wide energy targets, on the other hand, are more comprehensive, as they also necessitate fossil fuel alternatives in the transportation, industry, and buildings sectors. NRDC distinguish between renewable or clean electricity targets and renewable or clean energy targets in the Story Map.

State Renewable Portfolio Standards

In the face of federal climate inaction and damaging rollbacks, states have taken on the tremendous responsibility of advancing renewable energy deployment and emissions reductions. Since 2000, approximately 50 percent of U.S. renewable electricity generation and capacity has been driven by state renewable portfolio standards (RPS), also called renewable energy standards (RES), which specify the percent of retail electricity sales that must be supplied with renewable electricity.