A new, comprehensive analysis by McKinsey & Company—a global management consulting firm that provides advice to businesses, governments, and institutions—shows that an aggressive energy efficiency strategy will sharply lower the cost of addressing global warming.

Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the U.S. Economy demonstrates that the United States can meet the entire 2020 emissions reductions target in the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) bill and cut the nation’s energy bill at the same time—by $700 billion.

If policy makers get serious about energy efficiency and take the necessary steps—passing strong federal climate and energy policy like the ACES bill would be a good first step—the United States will reduce energy costs, creating a substantial net dollar savings for both consumers and businesses. And don’t forget global warming: using energy more efficiently would also reduce global warming pollution by 1.1 billion tons each year.

The report’s central conclusion: “Energy efficiency offers a vast, low-cost energy resource for the U.S. economy—but only if the nation can craft a comprehensive and innovative approach to unlock it.”

Unchecked climate change will cause heat waves, flooding, and reduce crop yields

According to a new peer-reviewed report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, global warming will seriously harm Minnesota’s climate and economy if the United States does not significantly reduce emissions.

Confronting Climate Change in Minnesota describes how the state’s climate could change under two different scenarios: one scenario assumes a business-as-usual increase in global warming pollution from continued heavy reliance on coal and oil, while the other assumes significantly lower emissions because of a transition to cleaner energy.

In the business-as-usual scenario, Minnesota summers would be up to 12 degrees hotter by the end of the century. Each summer, the Twin Cities would experience almost 70 days with highs over 90 degrees and almost a month of days hotter than 100. In rural Minnesota, the heat would take an intense toll on the state’s agriculture industry. Crops and livestock would experience substantially more heat stress—lowering yields and productivity—while heavy downpours would become more common year-round, causing more flooding and damage due to high water.

“The future changes documented in this report are sobering,” said co-author Dr. Donald Wuebbles, a climatologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. “The silver lining is that we can avoid the worst of these changes if we dramatically cut global warming emissions starting in the very near future.”

Michigan moves on global warming recommendations

Earlier this year, Michigan’s Climate Action Council—a diverse group of stakeholders from the manufacturing sector, utility companies, environmental groups, the auto industry, and the government—recommended an ambitious set of energy policy reforms for the state. Appointed by Governor Jennifer Granholm in 2008, the group reached a consensus on 54 specific ways to cut Michigan’s global warming emissions while protecting the state’s economic future.

The Council found that following the recommendations would generate a net cumulative savings of $10 billion for Michigan between 2009 and 2025. Most of the savings would come from energy efficiency measures that reduce costs for electricity and natural gas customers. On July 30, Governor Granholm issued an Executive Directive based on the Council’s recommendations and urged Michigan to forge ahead with plans to cut global warming pollution, move toward energy independence, and in turn, create more jobs for Michigan residents.

Back in 2007, Governor Tim Pawlenty created a similar task force—the Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group (MCCAG)—and charged the 56-member group with creating a climate action plan for Minnesota. MCCAG sent its final recommendations to the Minnesota Legislature and Governor Pawlenty in April 2008. Unlike in Michigan, however, Pawlenty has not yet championed his hand-picked advisory group’s recommendations at the state legislature.

A new, comprehensive analysis by McKinsey & Company—a global management consulting firm that provides advice to businesses, governments, and institutions—shows that an aggressive energy efficiency strategy will sharply lower the cost of addressing global warming.