State-led climate action can cut emissions at near-federal costs but favors different technologies.
other
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 40389458.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1038/s41467-025-59696-0 and PMC identifier 12089266.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
In the absence of comprehensive federal greenhouse gas mitigation policy, state-led strategies may play a pivotal role, particularly following the 2024 United States presidential election. Using a detailed energy system optimization model, we examine the outcomes of 23 climate-minded states pursuing net-zero emissions targets compared to a federal carbon cap achieving equivalent CO<sub>2</sub>-eq reductions. Here we show that state-led decarbonization results in distinct technology choices, a 0.7% increase in system costs, and nationwide emissions reduction of 46% - substantial, but insufficient for ambitious climate goals. This pathway relies more on electrification, with 952 terawatt-hours more generation in 2050, reallocating 17.2% of emissions to the power sector. Some regions favor solar, wind, and storage, while direct air capture emerges as critical, particularly in California and the Northeast. Inter-regional trading supports and complicates mitigation efforts, underscoring the need for careful policy design. Overall, our findings highlight how state-led and federal decarbonization approaches can yield differing energy portfolios to achieve similar emissions reductions.