A recent study indicates that state-led initiatives can significantly reduce carbon emissions, even without a comprehensive federal climate strategy. This research suggests that while such efforts may be slightly more costly than a coordinated national approach, they would likely result in the adoption of varied decarbonization technologies.
Jeremiah Johnson, an associate professor at North Carolina State University and corresponding author of the study, stated, “Given that there is little expectation the Trump administration will promote a national effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to address climate change, we think there is significant value in assessing what kind of difference state-led efforts could make.”
The study analyzed data from the energy systems of all 48 contiguous states, focusing on sectors like power generation and transportation. The researchers used this data in existing decarbonization models to assess potential impacts at both state and federal levels.
Gavin Mouat, first author of the paper and former graduate student at NC State, explained their findings: “We first looked at what the costs and technologies would be if the 23 states that already seemed inclined to strive for net zero carbon emissions actually achieved it. That would reduce U.S. carbon emissions by about 46% by 2050.”
The results showed only a 0.7% cost difference between state-led and federal approaches. However, technology adoption varied significantly due to differing state resources. For instance, some Great Plains states might focus on wind farms but are less likely to join a state-led initiative.
Johnson highlighted differences in technology use: “In a state-led scenario… industrial decarbonization – such as cleaner manufacturing technologies – played a far more prominent role than would be seen in a federally coordinated effort.” Conversely, federal coordination might emphasize clean energy sources like wind and solar.
Additionally, there is potential for these efforts to influence neighboring states’ pollution levels. Johnson noted, “Our model suggests it is possible that non-participating states could increase greenhouse gas emissions… However… those states might also reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.”
Johnson concluded with an important takeaway: “Ultimately the most important takeaway here is that state-led action can achieve substantial emission reductions… but that the world looks very different than one where there is federal coordination.”
The study was published in Nature Communications under the title “State-led Climate Action Can Cut Emissions at Near-federal Costs but Favors Different Technologies.” The research team included members from North Carolina State University and Carnegie Mellon University and received support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.
