USA

Overall rating
Insufficient
Policies & actions
Insufficient
< 3°C World
Domestic target
Almost Sufficient
< 2°C World
Fair share target
Insufficient
< 3°C World
Climate finance
Critically insufficient
Net zero target

year

2050

Comprehensiveness rated as

Average
Land use & forestry
Not significant
Policies & actions
Insufficient

According to our analysis, the US will need to implement additional policies to reach its proposed targets. The projected COVID-19 induced drop in emissions helped the US to meet its 2020 targets under the Copenhagen Accord. The emissions projections for 2020 are 20% below 2005 levels, which is 2 to 6 per cent points lower than the 2020 target (excl. LULUCF).

The Biden administration has set the goal to decarbonise the power sector by 2035, which is consistent with a Paris Agreement pathway. To achieve this, the Biden administration intends to set a Clean Energy Standard (CES) and invest USD 65 billion in modernising the power grid as part of its infrastructure plan. These measures must still be approved by the US Congress.

President Biden has also begun to target emissions reductions in the transport sector. The Biden Administration has set the goal to make half of all new vehicles sold in 2030 zero-emissions vehicles, which is not consistent with a Paris Agreement pathway. To achieve this, the administration proposed a stricter fuel efficiency and emissions standards for light-duty vehicles. California is again allowed to set more ambitious emissions standards than the federal government that can be adopted by other states, a position outlawed by the Trump Administration. Thirteen other US States and the District of Columbia have signed on to the California standard.

We rate the US policies and action as “Insufficient”. The “Insufficient” rating indicates that the US’ climate policies and action in 2030 need substantial improvements to be consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C temperature limit. If all countries were to follow the US approach, warming would reach over 2°C and up to 3°C. The range of policy projections for the US spans two rating categories: “Highly insufficient” and “Insufficient”.

For such cases, the CAT evaluates which end of the range is more likely. Given the ongoing policy developments and the reversal of the rollbacks of the Trump administration, the CAT finds it more likely that the emissions will follow the lower end of the range. If we rated the upper end of the range, policies and action would categorise as “Highly insufficient”, and this would also shift the overall rating to “Highly insufficient”.

The Biden administration proposed stricter fuel economy and GHG emissions standards for passenger vehicles for model years 2023-2026 and a phase down in the production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) over the next 15 years. The implementation of these policies would lead to 2% reduction in emissions in 2030 compared to current policy projections. The quantification of these two policies is reflected in the ‘Planned Policies’ scenario.

Further information on how the CAT rates countries (against Modelled domestic pathways and Fair share) can be found here.

Policy overview

With an anticipated strong economic recovery and without rapid implementation of further policy measures, emissions are expected to bounce back after the worst phase of the COVID‑19 pandemic in the US in 2020. The CAT estimates that US GHG emissions in 2020 will be 9% lower than 2019 and will rise again by 5% in 2021. Other studies estimate a 10% drop in emissions in 2020 (Rhodium Group, 2021b).

The impact of COVID-19 and corresponding lockdown measures in 2020 reduced energy demand in every energy end-use sector and had a corresponding impact on emissions. Energy-related CO2 emissions decreased by 11% in 2020. Transport and electricity generation, the two largest US GHG emitting sectors, saw reductions in CO2 emissions of 15% and 10% in 2020 compared to the previous year, respectively (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2021d).

According to our analysis, the US will need to implement additional policies to reach its proposed targets. If no further policies are implemented, the CAT projects that, after an increase in GHG emissions in 2021-2022, US emissions will remain relatively high and reach between 6.1 and 6.2 GtCO2e/year by 2030 (16%–18% below 2005 levels; and 3%–6% below 1990), excl. LULUCF. The CAT projects US emissions levels in 2030 would be between 64%–68% above the upper limit of the 2030 target if no further climate action or policies are implemented.

Our projections of US policies and action do not include policies in the two pieces of legislation currently before Congress: President Biden’s USD 1tnAmerican Jobs Plan (infrastructure bill) and the USD 3.5tn budget bill, as the two bills have yet to be passed by the House of Representatives and are subject to negotiation.

The US is very likely to achieve its 2020 targets, as the projected drop in emissions due to the COVID-19 pandemic would result in emissions of about 20% below 2005 levels in 2020 (excl. LULUCF) and its 2020 target is 14%–18% below 2005 levels (excl. LULUCF).

Compared to CAT projections in July 2020, US emissions projections, based on existing policies, have increased by 1%–7% in 2030. The main drivers of this increase are:

  • Policy rollbacks passed by the previous administration;
  • Emissions in 2030 are higher due to an update of the estimation of 2020 emissions, which are slightly (2%) higher than initially anticipated, and are followed by a spike in emissions in 2021 and 2022 because of COVID‑19 recovery, and remain at high levels until 2030.

The impact of policy rollbacks and updated estimations of 2020 emissions are partly offset by lower emissions in the electricity sector. The EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2021, used as the reference scenario for the current policy projections, projects 5% lower emissions from electricity generation in 2030 compared to the 2020 outlook, with increased electricity generation from renewables, and decreased generation from coal. Coal is now projected to account for 15% of generation in 2030 (down from the 17% projected in 2020), renewables for 35% of electricity generation (up from to 32% projected in 2020), and gas remains at a 35% share, with nuclear making up the rest (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2021a).

Increased state and local action, in addition to market pressures, may contribute to additional reductions. A pre-COVID-19 analysis of recorded and quantified commitments from sub-national and non-state actors in the US suggests that if these commitments were fully implemented they could lead to substantial reductions (America’s Pledge, 2019). If subnational efforts are reinforced with strong federal climate policies over the next decade, the US could reduce emissions 49% below 2005 levels by 2030. These commitments are not included in the CAT current policy scenario unless they are supported by implemented policies (see table below).

In December 2020, over 1,800 US private and financial institutions signed a statement calling for a national climate target that is “ambitious and equitable”. In 2021, prior to the announcement of the new NDC, the group “America Is All In” was launched with a call to at least halve US emissions by 2030 and businesses, universities, scientists, activists, and others declared their support for an ambitious NDC (America Is All In, 2021). Similarly, the coalition “We Mean Business, composed of 408 businesses and investors, signed an open letter to President Biden indicating their support for the Biden administration’s commitment to ambitious climate action (We Mean Business coalition, 2021)

The interest, engagement and commitment of non-federal actors in climate action enhances the feasibility and credibility of achieving ambitious climate targets, which require the buy-in and commitment of the private sector, civil society and subnational institutions. The importance of this alignment is evidenced by the impact of climate actions coming from non-federal actors, who counter-balanced the inaction of the federal government in climate policy over the past four years.


Selected state level policies included in CAT projections

The CAT current policy projections for energy-related CO2 emissions are based on the EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2020), which includes the following state level policies:

  • California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (SB32)
  • California’s cap and trade system (California Global Warming Solutions Act)
  • Repeal of California Advanced Clean Cars program including the Zero Emissions Vehicle program.
  • 30 State Renewable Portfolio Standards and the District of Columbia Renewable Portfolio Standards
  • Northeast Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
  • State motor fuels taxes

Recent developments

On his first day in office, on January 20 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order to re-join the US to the Paris Agreement, reversing the active undermining of climate ambition of the previous four years, and signalling that the incoming administration puts climate at the centre of its agenda. President Biden also signed other executive orders that directs agencies and departments to enact climate-friendly policies across the government and to review and address the promulgation of the climate rollbacks of the previous four years (The White House, 2021j, 2021b, 2021k).

The high priority that the Biden administration places on climate change is explicitly stated in one of his first executive orders “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad”. The executive order reaffirms the goal to achieve net zero GHG emissions by 2050, encourages a government-wide approach to tackle climate change, mandates the use of federal purchasing power, property and public lands and waters to support climate action, and establishes high-level interagency groups to facilitate coordination, planning and implementation of climate action at federal level (The White House, 2021b).

The executive order establishes the creation of the Climate Policy Office, the National Climate Task Force, the White House environmental justice advisory council (WHEJAC), and the Interagency Working Group on Coal.

  • The Climate Policy Office is responsible for the coordination of climate policy-making processes and ensure that domestic climate-policy decisions and programs are consistent with climate targets.
  • The National Climate Task Force consists of cabinet-level leaders from all federal agencies and senior White House officials to mobilise and facilitate the organisation and deployment of a government-wide approach to tackle climate change, and facilitate planning and implementation of key Federal climate actions.
  • The WHEJAC aims to increase the Federal Government’s efforts to address environmental injustice through monitoring, enforcement and advisory in climate mitigation, adaptation, clean energy transition, among other areas.
  • the Interagency Working Group on Coal coordinates the identification and delivery of Federal resources to revitalise the economies of coal, oil and gas, and power plant communities as the country shifts to a clean energy economy.

The Biden administration also directed heads of agencies to identify fossil fuel subsidies and take steps to stop them, suspended oil and natural gas drilling leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and revoked the permits for the Keystone XL pipeline (The White House, 2021b, 2021a; U.S. Department of the Interior, 2021b). Less encouragingly, the Biden administration has defended a new oil and gas project in the North Slope of Alaska (The New York Times, 2021a)

In addition to the immediate actions taken via Executive Orders, the Biden administration has taken important steps to break with his predecessor and pursue a green recovery. The American Rescue Plan Act, signed into law on March 11 2021, primarily focused on COVID-19 and economic stimulus measures for households, but also included a number of climate-relevant provisions. The law provides over USD 30bn to assist mass transit systems that experienced funding shortfalls from reduced ridership during the pandemic. The law also provides USD 350bn to state and local governments which play an important role in implementing and enforcing local energy and climate measures (U.S. Congress, 2021).

In late July, the US Senate passed a USD 1tn infrastructure investment bill (“Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act”) with bipartisan support, which aims to spur economic recovery and update the country’s infrastructure while accelerating climate action. The bill includes USD 550 billion in new spending, while the rest is comprised of previously-approved funding. Overall, the plan focuses spending on transit, pollution clean-up and to upgrading the nation’s infrastructure to be better prepared against the impacts of climate change such as intensifying wildfires, hurricanes and flooding (U.S. Senate, 2021b).

Although it would be the largest federal investment into infrastructure projects in more than a decade, the roughly half trillion USD in new spending is less than a quarter of the size of the more ambitious infrastructure investment plan that President Biden originally proposed in March (the USD 2.3tn “American Jobs Plan”). Compared to the original plan, the bipartisan bill significantly scaled back or eliminated most of the components relevant to climate action, including investments in clean energy, transport infrastructure, industry, buildings, and research and technology infrastructure. The implementation of a more ambitious plan such as that originally proposed would be key to helping the US transition and reach its climate target of reducing greenhouse gases 50%-52% below 2005 levels by 2030 (The White House, 2021i).

The following components were removed from the final version of the bill passed by the Senate:

  • USD 35bn investment in R&D in climate science, clean technology, and innovation (such as research and demonstration projects in utility-scale storage, CCS, hydrogen, floating offshore wind, etc.).
  • USD 46bn investment in clean energy manufacturing.
  • USD 40bn investment in sector-based training programs focused on growing clean energy and manufacturing sectors.
  • Extend the 48C tax credit, which originally provided a 30% investment tax credit to 183 domestic clean energy manufacturing facilities.
  • Eliminate tax preferences for fossil fuels and make sure polluting industries pay for their emissions.

Other sectoral elements of the “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” and their differences with the original proposal are presented in the analysis of each individual sector.

Before President Biden can sign it into law, the infrastructure bill must still pass the House of Representatives. The legislation might face delays in the House of Representatives until the Senate passes a far more ambitious USD 3.5tn budgetary plan bill. This budget proposal, presented by the Democrats and intended to pass later this year through a budget reconciliation, is expected to contain many of the climate-ambitious components that were left out of the bipartisan infrastructure plan, such as billions on direct payments to utilities achieving clean energy goals or to incentives to make homes more energy efficient. However, it is expected to face significant obstacles and it will likely not receive the bipartisan support of the infrastructure plan.

Non-state actors have also urged the need for green stimulus packages for the US. An open letter (“A Green Stimulus to Rebuild Our Economy”) from a group of climate and social policy experts in academia and civil society (Green Stimulus Proposal, 2020) proposed a recovery package to create millions of green jobs and accelerate a Just Transition away from fossil fuels. The Bluegreen Alliance urged the US Congress to pass a robust set of stimulus packages that meet sustainability and climate resilience principles and standards.

The proposal includes the following action points: forward-looking planning and investments to meet environmental standards, investment in strategic low-carbon solutions, renewal and expansion of clean energy and tax credits, and establishment of a new loan fund and grant programme for climate-resilient infrastructure, among others (BlueGreen Alliance, 2020). At the state level, New York passed new legislation that makes renewable energy an integral part of New York state’s post-COVID-19 economic recovery (PV Magazine, 2020).

Reversing Trump-era policy rollbacks

On his first day in office, President Biden signed Executive Orders directing all agencies to review and rescind the rollbacks of the previous four years that were deemed a threat to the government’s ability to confront climate change (The White House, 2021b, 2021k). While most of the rollbacks have been addressed in one way or another, many are still pending on final rulemaking (The New York Times, 2021c; Washington Post, 2021).

In May 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rescinded a Trump-era regulation that restricted which public health benefits could be factored into new air rules (know as the cost-benefit rule). The original rule effectively weakened the government’s ability to curb air pollution and it would make it easier for polluting companies to fight regulations in court. The new rule changes the way cost-benefit analyses are used, which is now designed to allow the EPA to factor in the economic costs and co-benefits of new clean air and climate change rules by allowing regulators to put a price on proved health benefits (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2021e).

Other sector-specific rollbacks from the previous administration and their status are addressed in each of the sectoral analyses below.

While these are positive developments, it is not enough for President Biden to simply restore environmental rules and reverse the previous administration’s rollbacks on climate policy. The US needs to step up climate action and implement ambitious polices to reduce its own emissions by 2030 that are at least consistent with its own climate target (NDC), if not the Paris Agreement 1.5°C warming limit.

Finance

The Biden administration announced its International Climate Finance Plan the same day the US submitted its new climate target. The plan focuses on the role of the US to scale up and mobilise international climate finance and align it with country needs, strategies, and priorities to help unlock deep GHG emissions reductions in developing countries. Notably, the plan also calls for a phase out of international finance for “carbon intensive fossil fuel-based energy” both bilaterally and through multinational fora (The White House, 2021e).

The plan aims to provide the US government with a strategic vision on international climate finance with a 2025 horizon and outlines instruments to mobilise USD 100bn a year for developing countries from public and private sources. With this, the US intends to double annual public climate finance to developing countries by 2024 (relative to the average level during President Obama’s second term, 2013-2016). The plan directs US departments, agencies, and development partners to define a climate change strategy and incorporate climate considerations into their international work and investments. The US also intends to ensure that future reporting is transparent and aligned with the strategic approach to climate finance (detailed reporting, tracking finance and enhanced reporting on mobilisation and impact).

Domestically, the US Treasury has taken a lead role in redirecting financial flows to support climate action with a new “Treasury Climate Hub” and “Climate Counsellor” to coordinate the different climate activities in domestic finance, economic policy, international affairs, and tax policy.

An additional Executive Order from the White House has called for “consistent, clear, intelligible, comparable, and accurate disclosure of climate-related financial risk” (The White House, 2021c). The US Securities and Exchange Commission had already started a public consultation on disclosure so as to enable investors to make better informed decisions considering climate risks (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2021). In line with the new policy, the US EPA has already urged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (an independent body), to consider lock-in and stranded assets risks for gas pipelines (S&P Global Market Intelligence, 2021).

Latest publications

Stay informed

Subscribe to our newsletter