Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions (2024)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

2 Energy Justice and Equity ABSTRACT The U.S. federal government has put forth a whole-of-government equity agenda through a series of executive orders and legislation. This national focus on equitable outcomes of the transition to net-zero energy systems will directly and indirectly allow for the incorporation of equity into future federal, state, and local decarbonization action. However, without the intentional attention to energy justice or its principles, a just energy transition cannot be achieved in the United States. The transition to a net-zero-carbon future offers multiple socioeconomic benefits, including improved public health and energy affordability, but action is needed to en- sure energy justice can be advanced. This requires disadvantaged communities, local governments, and community-based organizations to be engaged in defining where, when, and how to prioritize federal and state resources during the energy transition. Inclusive and equitable approaches are key to preventing potential implementation challenges or project derailment. Place-based decarbonization approaches that address the priorities and concerns of affected communities will help support an equitable transition to a net-zero future that avoids worsening existing inequities or creating new ones. For the transition to be a success, there needs to be a bottom-up approach beginning with community-led programs sharing lessons learned coupled with a top-down process beginning with federal adoption and implementation of energy justice principles. This chapter out- lines principles and best practices of energy justice and reviews the opportunities and barriers associated with different energy justice approaches. Table 2-3, at the end of the chapter, summarizes all the recommendations that appear in this chapter to sup- port a just energy transition. 87 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 87 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S INTRODUCTION While the transition to a net-zero energy system will offer multiple socioeconomic advantages for society, such as access to affordable energy options, economic and employment progress, and improvement of human health (Õunmaa 2021), it is not a foregone conclusion that these opportunities will extend to all. Without an intentional and concerted movement away from inequitable energy structures and policies, disadvantaged populations—such as racial, ethnic, and low-income communities—may experience even more burdens from the new energy system than they do today. Recent federal action provides a critical down payment on a just and equitable transition. However, the critical opportunity to enhance societal and economic outcomes comes with equity challenges that require careful attention and intentional action. For example, exposure to air pollution from fossil fuel combustion is one of the most significant disparities of the current energy system (see Chapter 3). A large-scale change in the production, distribution, and use of energy will likely require the elimi- nation of most fossil fuel use. This will significantly reduce nearly all associated air pol- lution, providing positive impacts nationally. However, disproportionate and negative health and socioeconomic outcomes of societal and technological change have been well-documented in low-income populations and communities of color (Lerner 2010; Méndez 2020; Romero-Lankao et al. 2022). Negative outcomes of the U.S. energy transition, especially increased air pollution from the construction of new infrastruc- ture or from the continued combustion of fossil fuels, can undermine the success of an equitable carbon-neutral future. This transition is not merely a technological transformation of the energy sector; it is a fundamental and wholesale transformation that will affect numerous sectors and nearly every household. This chapter will address the challenges associated with two of the core societal goals identified in the first report: ensuring a just and equitable transition to carbon neutrality and ensuring that workers, communities, and busi- nesses impacted by the transition are fully supported during the transition (NASEM 2021). It begins by outlining the evolution of the just transition movement and intro- ducing key components and principles of energy justice. It reviews existing energy in- equities in several areas, including energy affordability and accessibility to low-carbon technologies, and discusses how energy policies and programs can be developed to redress inequities and avoid creating new ones. The chapter then assesses recent fed- eral actions that can support a just energy transition and equitable implementation of decarbonization actions. The chapter concludes with recommendations for how to build capacity to support a community-level decarbonization action and develop evaluation standards to detail the nation’s progress toward a just energy transition. 88 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 88 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity EVOLUTION OF THE JUST TRANSITION MOVEMENT: FROM ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE TO ENERGY JUSTICE The transition of U.S. energy systems to a net-zero-carbon future offers access to af- fordable energy options, economic and employment progress, and the improvement of human health (Õunmaa 2021). However, challenges exist and cannot be ignored as the transition proceeds. Initially used by coal communities and the labor movement, the modern just transition concept focuses on inclusive processes to achieve climate and energy goals and envelops three overlapping concepts: environmental justice, climate justice, and energy justice. Decarbonizing the energy system is an opportunity to move forward on energy justice—the provision of safe, affordable, and sustain- able energy—for the nation and internationally. Box 2-1 provides key terms that will be used throughout the chapter. This section briefly traces the scholarship of the just transition movement and the key concepts of the environmental and climate justice. It then introduces the energy justice movement and key principles that need to be ap- plied to decarbonization policy to achieve a just energy transition. History of the Just Transition and Environmental and Climate Justice Movements In the United States, the original use of the term “just transition” began with the labor movement in the late 1970s, which advocated for the protection, support, and compen- sation of displaced workers and communities when a society makes significant policy decisions resulting in job loss in energy-related businesses (Carley and Konisky 2020). It BOX 2-1 KEY TERMS Energy justice—the provision of safe, affordable, and sustainable energy to all individuals (Jenkins 2018) through the incorporation of recognitional, procedural, and distributional equity into energy design, owner- ship, governance, and implementation. Energy transition—efforts by jurisdictions to transform or develop their energy sector away from fossil fuels (Bozeman et al. 2022) with a large-scale technological and societal change in the production, distribution, and use of energy. Equity—being fair and unbiased regarding access, opportunities, risks, and burdens for an individual or group, especially as a function of an organization or system (Romero-Lankao and Nobler 2021). Just energy transition—a process of transforming the energy system by ensuring that all communities, workers, and social groups are fairly included in the processes toward and outcomes of the net-zero future through the incorporation of the principles of energy justice. Justice—ensuring that all individuals and groups have the necessary and sufficient capability to achieve the lives they value (Sen 2009). 89 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 89 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S FIGURE 2-1  Temporal illustration of when just transition movements were introduced, and the definition for and the key goals of each movement. has come to be used more broadly with scholars arguing that a just transition ensures that “workers and communities supported by a declining industry are able to transition into a new economy with a comparable level of economic security or retire with dignity” (Cha 2020, p. 149) and with advocacy groups emphasizing that a just transition means “meeting climate goals by ensuring the whole of society—all communities, all workers, all social groups—are brought along with the pivot to a net-zero future” (UNDP 2022). Envi- ronmental, climate, and energy justice have emerged as guiding principles for just transi- tion action and conceptually exist in parallel (Jenkins et al. 2018). Figure 2-1 shows how the just transition movement has evolved beyond its origins in concerns with impacts on workers to encompass a broader array of principles for just and equitable change.1 The contemporary environmental justice movement can be traced to the 1980s. Its earliest claims dealt with “environmental racism,” which emphasizes how racial minor- ity communities are targeted, intentionally or unintentionally, for disproportionate exposure to pollutants or degraded environments (Bullard 2002). Environmental 1  For a literature review about the just transition movement in North America, see Wilgosh et al. (2022). For an overview of just transition frameworks, see Henry et al. (2020). 90 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 90 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity racism is coupled with the systemic exclusion of Black, Indigenous, Latino, and other communities of color in decisions on environmental policymaking, enforcement, and remediation (Méndez 2020). These communities have historically been subject to and have mobilized against institutional processes that have resulted in residential segregation, unsafe housing stock, inadequate transportation options, displacement, disinvestment, and neglect (Covington 2009; Ong et al. 2023; Romero-Lankao et al. 2022; Walker 2009). The movement stresses the need for vulnerable communities to have access to environmental decision-making and for the harms and benefits of envi- ronmental development to be fairly distributed. Environmental justice groups have long maintained that climate change mitigation measures might inadvertently increase localized air pollution unless both hazards are understood through the lens of human health. However, such connections have only recently been foregrounded in climate change policymaking in the United States (Méndez 2020; Yoder 2022). EPA’s finding that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act marked a shift toward recognizing this entwined nature by identifying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as a pollution associated with fossil fuel combustion (EPA 2009). More recently, the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program codified this language and shift in perspective by defining greenhouse gases as “the air pollutants carbon dioxide, hydrofluorocarbons, methane, nitrous oxide, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride” (P.L. 117-58 §60114). The concept of “climate pollution” bridges conversations focused on environmental justice issues and those focused on climate mitigation by relying on the broadly held concerns about the effects of multiple sources of “pollution” on individuals’ health (Méndez 2020; Yoder 2022). The climate justice movement, which emerged in the late 1990s, recognizes the global and disproportionate responsibility for and impacts of climate change (Baker et al. 2019; Schlosberg and Collins 2014). The movement acknowledges that coun- tries and communities historically contributing least to climate change are more likely to be most impacted by climate change (Birkmann et al. 2022). Climate justice discussions have revolved around two issues: responsibility for climate mitigation and climate adaptation. For mitigation responsibility, in 2019, the combined GHG emissions from the least-developed countries2 contributed 3.3 percent to global 2  TheIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines least-developed countries as those meeting the following criteria: “(1) a low income criterion below a certain threshold of gross national income per capita of 750 to 900 (USD), (2) a human resource weakness based on indicators of health, education, and adult literacy, and (3) an economic vulnerability weakness based on indicators on instability of agricultural production, instability of export of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, mer- chandise export concentration, and the handicap of economic smallness.” These criteria and the list of least- developed countries are designated by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (IPCC 2022). 91 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 91 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S GHG emissions (IPCC 2022), whereas the United States alone emitted 12.5 percent of global emissions (Ge et al. 2022). Regarding adaptation, the poorest and most vulnerable communities are the most at risk to the impacts of climate change, including in high-income countries (Birkmann et al. 2022; Carley and Konisky 2020; Romero-Lankao and Norton 2018). This is especially true for female, Latino, Black, and LGBTQ+ individuals within U.S. communities (Goldsmith et al. 2022; Méndez et al. 2020). Inadequate infrastructure and supportive aid—such as safe housing, emergency response systems, and health care—increase the vulnerability of these groups to climate change (Birkmann et al. 2022). Like the environmental justice movement, this movement advocates for affected communities to have access to climate change mitigation decision-making to ensure that policy efforts address disproportionate climate harms. The Energy Justice Movement In recent years, the just transition movement has increasingly focused on energy, in what some have referred to as “a new front-line in environmental justice research and activism” (Sze and London 2008). The concept of energy justice focuses separately on energy concerns among the broader issues addressed in the environmental justice movement (Bickerstaff et al. 2013; Jenkins et al. 2018) by integrating social equity principles into energy systems. An overlap of environmental justice and energy justice is the siting of energy infrastructure: an energy justice approach considers whether the location of energy infrastructure makes energy more affordable or accessible for historically disadvantaged households, whereas an environmental justice approach broadly considers whether the location of energy infrastructure unequally burdens a nearby community. Key to the energy justice movement is access to new energy system benefits and access to clean and affordable energy for everyone. With energy justice, energy systems can support economic growth in addition to energy security for individuals and communities. See Chapter 5 for more information about com- munity energy projects, community benefits agreements, and energy sovereignty for tribal nations. An energy transition can provide enormous opportunities for cleaner energy sources, new employment, and technological innovation (Cha 2020; Miller 2022, 2023). However, it also can exacerbate existing disparities afflicting communities of color and low-income neighborhoods or reduce access to opportunities that accompany energy transitions (Carley and Konisky 2020). Despite the shared manifestations of racial– ethnic and income-based disparities, research has shown that racial–ethnic factors 92 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 92 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity have a larger effect on disparities than income-based factors. For example, a review of national exposure to air pollution from 1990 to 2010 found absolute exposure dispari- ties were larger for racial and ethnic groups than for income categories (Liu et al. 2021; see Chapter 3 for more information). Due to the absence of racial–ethnic indicators in the federal government’s definition of disadvantaged communities, the discussions in this chapter focus on income-based disparities of the U.S. energy system. However, it is important to acknowledge and understand the distinction between racial–ethnic and income-based factors to develop appropriate solutions. The committee defines a “just energy transition” as the process of transforming the en- ergy system by ensuring that all communities, workers, and social groups are included in the processes toward and outcomes of the net-zero future through the incorpora- tion of the principles of energy justice. Incorporating energy justice principles in the energy transition will provide the nation an opportunity to prioritize human-centered approaches in energy system design and policymaking so that the costs and benefits of energy services are distributed fairly (Tarekegne et al. 2021), thus making it just. Furthermore, Table 2-1 illustrates four principles of energy justice, their focus, and guiding questions. The energy justice principles provide an analytical and decision-making framework for researchers, advocates, policy makers, and communities to understand the human and social dimensions of energy systems and their inequities (Sovacool and Dworkin 2014).3 This chapter largely focuses on recognitional, procedural, and distributional equity in its discussion of barriers, examples, and recommended solutions. However, restorative equity provides important context-setting for recognitional, procedural, and distributional equity and is therefore the foundation of all equity frameworks (Spurlock et al. 2022). The integration of energy justice principles needs to be both a bottom-up approach beginning with community-led programs sharing lessons learned and best practices and a top-down process beginning with federal adoption and implementation of these principles. The term “intersectionality” describes how structures and systems of oppression— such as racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, and redlining—heighten the effects of discrimination, exclusion, and social inequality on communities marginal- ized by multiple systems (Cooper 2016; Crenshaw 1989; Dhamoon 2011; Goldsmith et al. 2022; Roman 2017). An intersectional approach to energy justice emphasizes how multiple systems of marginalization and human identities interact to increase 3   For more information, see Carley (2022); Heffron and McCauley (2017); Romero-Lankao and Nobler (2021); and Schlosberg (2007). 93 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 93 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S TABLE 2-1  Principles of Energy Justice, Their Focus, and Related Guiding Questions Principle Focus Guiding Questions Recognitional (or Understand structural determinants • Who is vulnerable and excluded and Structural) Equity of exclusion and vulnerability and how? specific needs associated with energy • Who is privileged and how? services among social groups (Energy Equity Project 2022) and institutionalize accountability (Park 2014). Procedural Equity Promote diverse representation and •  Who is at the table? a meaningful voice for impacted • What power do they have in communities among decision makers influencing planning, decision- and energy service providers (Energy making, implementation, and Equity Project 2022). evaluation? Distributional How the benefits and harms of the • Who bears the brunt of the burdens Equity energy system are distributed (Energy and how? Equity Project 2022). • Who receives the most benefits and how? Restorative (or Decision makers ensure that all potential • Who will remedy the foregoing Transgenerational) harms and injustices are addressed in injustices, and how? Equity prevention and mitigation plans (Energy • How can we rectify past injustices Equity Project 2022) and generational caused by the energy system? impacts are considered (Park 2014). exposure to environmental harms and reduce access to energy and environmental benefits (Crenshaw 2017; Goldsmith et al. 2022; Kaijser and Kronsell 2014). Efforts have analyzed how intersectionality affects distributional inequalities to create energy inequities and have made recommendations to target the social and political practices of exclusion through which these inequalities are generated (Schlosberg and Collins 2014; Walker 2009). Relatedly, “[e]nergy democracy” recognizes such intersectional factors as it focuses attention on strengthening inclusive decision-making processes and democratic institutions, often through decentralized energy projects (Berthod et al. 2022; Nadesan et al. 2023). (See Chapter 5 for more on energy democracy and engaging the public in the energy transition.) ENERGY INEQUITIES: HISTORICAL AND RECENT TRENDS Some aspects of the energy transition could aggravate, rather than address, energy inequities if decarbonization actions are not intentionally focused on equity and jus- tice (Carley et al. 2018b; Romero-Lankao et al. 2022; Sovacool et al. 2022). For example, 94 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 94 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity the energy transition can reinforce inequities in access to affordable, accessible, and safe energy; it may create new health risks; and may limit opportunities for workforce development in both communities dependent on fossil fuels and new, renewable energy systems (Carley and Konisky 2020; Carley et al. 2021; Cha 2022). It is important to recognize the historical factors and patterns that led to present-day disparities to avoid creating new or worsening existing inequities during and following the energy transition. This section analyzes four historical and recent trends in energy-relevant inequities: energy affordability; accessibility, acceptability, and adoption; public health and community resilience; and jobs and workforce development. Energy Affordability The current energy system has led to disparities in energy affordability, the ability to afford one’s energy bills, with disadvantaged communities experiencing most of the negative costs. Intersecting systemic inequities result in households’ experienc- ing unequal access to basic energy, unequal ability to meet basic energy needs, and unequal availability of the income needed to obtain energy. Energy burden, energy insecurity, and energy poverty are increasingly severe instances of social inequi- ties that in turn relate to unequal vulnerability to other stressors. Analyzing energy system impacts across intersecting socioeconomic and demographic metrics4 allows for the identification of individuals who are most vulnerable, underserved, or marginalized (Hernández et al. 2014; Jenkins 2018). Energy poverty, the lack of affordable, reliable, and environmentally sound energy services (Reddy 2000), will be directly addressed through the incorporation of energy justice into the U.S. energy transition. Energy insecurity is the inability to adequately meet basic household energy needs over time (Hernández et al. 2016). It is attributed to several factors, including inefficient housing and appliances leading to more inefficient energy use; lack of financial resources to afford air conditioning and heat pumps; and unequal access to cooling or heating that may lead some residents to dangerously under-heat or under-cool their homes (Hernández et al. 2014). These energy inequities amplify other existing health, educational, and socioeconomic disparities and further reinforce obstacles to civic participation in society (Bouzarovski 2018). For ex- ample, households with children are more likely to engage in dangerous financial 4  A literature review of 10 reports on energy criteria noted that the terms metric, indicator, and index were frequently understood to have the same definition across the reports (Tarekegne et al. 2021). This report primarily uses the term “metric.” The committee notes that CEQ utilizes “indicator” in the develop- ment and publication of the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool. 95 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 95 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S and behavioral coping strategies, to be disconnected from energy services, and to be energy insecure (Carley et al. 2022; Konisky et al. 2022; Memmott et al. 2021). Furthermore, children in moderately and severely energy insecure households are more likely to experience food insecurity, hospitalizations, and developmental concerns than children in energy secure homes (Cook et al. 2008; Hernández et al. 2016; Smith et al. 2007). Energy burden, the percentage of gross household energy costs spent on energy, is a metric that operationalizes energy affordability and identifies groups in need of targeting policies and investments to reduce high energy burdens (Cong et al. 2022). According to a survey by Indiana University’s Energy Justice Lab, nearly 40 percent of Latino households and more than 26 percent of Black households said that they were unable to pay their electricity bill (Carley et al. 2022) and thus experience high energy burden. Additionally, compared to White respondents, Latino and Black respondents were 80 percent and 30 percent, respectively, more likely to have their service discon- nected by their utility provider, which often comes with additional fees to restore electricity services (Carley et al. 2022). Poor housing conditions, including lack of insulation and old rooftops, and a lack of transportation options, such as accessible public transit and safe biking, tend to perpetuate high energy burdens (Drehobl and Ross 2016). Households within disadvantaged communities in the United States often spend a larger fraction of their household income on utilities for heating, cooling, and other home energy services than the general population (Drehobl and Ross 2016; Drehobl et al. 2020). Data from the Department of Energy (DOE) Low-Income Energy Afford- ability Data (LEAD) Tool,5 designed to improve the understanding of states, communi- ties, and stakeholders about energy characteristics, shows that the average energy burden for low-income households is 8.6 percent (DOE 2020), which is more than double the national median of 3.1 percent. Figure 2-2 illustrates the comparison of the national median energy burden with the median energy burden of certain groups. However, average energy burden does not accurately reflect existing discrepancies in utility rates, especially between rural and coastal urban areas. During the develop- ment and implementation of programs addressing energy burden, regional differ- ences must be considered and adjusted for. Increases in the cost of energy often force families to decide whether to spend more of their household income on energy or on something else such as rent, 5  See the Department of Energy’s “Low-Income Energy Affordability Data Tool” at https://www.energy. gov/scep/slsc/lead-tool. 96 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 96 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity FIGURE 2-2  National energy burdens across subgroups compared with the national median energy burden. Orange bars show energy burden for low-income populations. Red bars show energy burden by race and ethnicity. The purple bar shows energy burden for older adults. Blue bars show energy burden for renters and owners. Green bars show energy burden by housing type. NOTE: FPL, Federal Poverty Level. SOURCE: Data from Drehobl et al. (2020). education, food, and transportation (Brown et al. 2020). Disadvantaged communi- ties tend to have older or less energy-efficient homes, which increases household energy expenses. These households often either cannot afford to upgrade to energy efficient products or are renters and do not have the ability to do so. Subsidies and programs such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) are designed to mitigate these bur- dens (Brown et al. 2020; Hernández and Bird 2010). However, these programs have historically been underfunded and tend to be intentionally short-term solutions that ensure that utilities—not the households—are protected against potential debts and disconnection of services. Programs designed to mitigate energy burden also suffer from significant implementation failures (Carley et al. 2022; Farley et al. 2021) and tend to be hard for consumers to navigate. The benefits of the energy transition to date have not always been equally distrib- uted. The energy burdens of inefficient appliances, homes, and vehicles persist in low-income populations and for households of color. Conversely, wealthier consumers can afford the relatively high up-front costs of energy-saving and emission-reducing technologies (e.g., high-efficiency air conditioners, smart 97 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 97 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S meters, electric vehicles, heat pumps, and rooftop solar), which have lower op- erating costs and so decrease their total energy costs (Carley and Konisky 2020; Drehobl and Ross 2016; Ross et al. 2018). Such energy-saving devices are often cost prohibitive for and not prioritized by low-income households, especially when a working fossil fuel–based device (e.g., gas-powered furnace) is already in place (Agyeman et al. 2016; Lukanov and Krieger 2019; Morrissey et al. 2020). To address the challenge of energy affordability and associated burdens and achieve energy justice, it is important to recognize these existing burdens and the inter- secting factors that influence them. Accessibility, Acceptability, and Adoption Disadvantaged communities are often economically excluded from, reluctant to adopt, or unaware of opportunities to install low-carbon technologies. This might be owing to fear of hidden costs, program limitations, lack of trust in government, inadequate outreach and information, insufficient capacity, and inequitable and predatory financing (Madrid 2017; Méndez et al. 2020; Vogelsong 2022). For example, split incentives between owner and tenant create barriers to the energy transition, as building owners do not have any incentive to pay for retrofits, en- ergy efficiency, or safety improvements if only tenants receive the benefits from decreased energy bills (Besley 2010; Boudet 2019; Segreto et al. 2020). Solutions for the tensions caused by split incentives need to be designed to create tangible benefits for both parties. (For more information about split incentives, see Chapter 7.) Inadequate or lacking community engagement might result in rejection of and even opposition to new technologies for reasons that include, but are not limited to, the high costs associated with smart home devices and the physical look of renewable infrastructure (Boudet 2019; Devine-Wright 2005; Devine-Wright and Devine-Wright 2009). Examples include public opposition to wind energy and the siting of bioenergy infrastructures, owing to concerns about security, privacy, noise, and potential health and socioeconomic impacts (Boudet 2019; Selfa et al. 2011; Wüste and Schmuck 2012). Similar dynamics exist in other energy industries that will be heavily impacted by the energy transition, including the automobile and oil and gas industries. For the committee’s recommendations on opportuni- ties and practices to overcome obstacles to meaningful public engagement, see Chapter 5. For ensuring access to subsidies for improving building efficiency, see Chapter 7, and for equity in access to electric vehicles and public transportation, see Chapter 9. 98 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 98 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Public Health and Community Resilience The effect of air pollution, extreme heat, and other environmental stressors on commu- nities is often determined by socio-spatial inequalities6 in exposure experienced and the capacity to mitigate health risks (Harvey 2008; Logan and Molotch 2005). These ef- fects and disparities are further associated with intersectional factors such as race, gen- der, and income. For instance, the average exposures to diesel particles are higher than average for non-White, lower-income households living along transportation corridors (Romero-Lankao et al. 2022). Furthermore, the legacies of past discriminatory practices often prevent disadvantaged communities from reaping the rewards of tree shade, open space, good-quality housing, energy-efficient building envelopes, and cleaner air (Church et al. 2000; Lucas 2012; Morello-Frosch et al. 2011). Recent analysis by Romitti et al. (2022) shows similar inequalities in the access to residential air conditioning in metropolitan areas where heat extremes and urban heat island effects are increas- ing. Such systemic inequities contribute to higher adverse health impacts and lower community resilience, where community resilience is defined as capacity to draw on income, education, and other socioeconomic resources to adapt to pollution, extreme heat, energy outages, and other disruptions (Harlan et al. 2013; Hayden et al. 2011; Qin et al. 2015; Romero-Lankao et al. 2016). See Chapter 3 for more information about the disparities in public health impacts from pollution and extreme heat. In the 1930s, the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation, a now-defunct government- sponsored entity, graded neighborhoods according to levels of mortgage risk (Hillier 2003; Jackson 1985; Michney and Winling 2020). “Areas with African Americans, as well as those with older housing and poorer households, were consistently given a fourth grade, or ‘hazardous,’ rating and colored red” in a practice known as redlining (Hillier 2003, p. 395). Meanwhile, those same neighborhoods were often targeted as sites for undesirable land uses such as major freeway construction (Bullard 2004). Such projects resulted in the displacement of and exposure to construction pollution for redlined communities (Jackson 1980, 1985; Katznelson 2005; Massey and Denton 1998; Michney and Winling 2020; Rothstein 2017). The effects of these practices are still evident today. Figure 2-3 shows the interplay of the Home Owners’ Loan Corpora- tion Risk Rating and disproportionate nitrogen oxides (NOx) exposure for communities of color in Berkeley and Oakland, California. Another outcome of construction and land-use projects in redlined areas is the develop- ment of urban heat islands, areas with higher-than-average temperatures (Guhathakurta and Gober 2007; Hoffman et al. 2020; Hsu et al. 2021; Romero-Lankao et al. 2012). 6  The manifestation of social inequalities into spatial patterns (Han 2022). 99 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 99 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S FIGURE 2-3  Maps of air pollution exposure and population density of people of color show that areas that the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation deemed “hazardous” in 1930, outlined in red, are now some of the areas with high NOx air pollution and high concentrations of people of color. SOURCE: Zhong and Popovich (2022), © 2022 The New York Times Company. All rights reserved. Used under license. These high temperatures have fatal outcomes; in the United States, exposure to extreme heat led to about 17,000 premature deaths in 2020 (Shindell et al. 2021). On the other hand, adaptation to heat with air conditioning requires more energy and if that energy continues to be generated with fossil fuels, this runs the risk of perpetuating adverse health impacts from air pollution from fossil fuel combustion. An increase in surfaces cov- ered with vegetation and permeable, reflective materials can decrease the temperature of heat islands and the need to overuse air conditioning indoors. However, such features are less common in disadvantaged neighborhoods which leads to higher temperature that can lead to higher morbidity and mortality risks. See Chapters 3 and 7 for more on urban planning and building retrofits to address heat islands. Jobs and Workforce Development National energy production and carbon-intensive industries provide significant economic output and jobs, but national-level trends in the green economy play out unevenly across geographies, leading to opportunities for some while leaving 100 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 100 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity others behind (Cameron and van der Zwann 2015; E2 2019; NASEM 2023). Com- munities dependent on the fossil fuel industry have expressed concerns about the disruption that will be faced during the transition, including the potential lack of access to high-quality job opportunities that offer similar economic stability as the jobs lost (Cha 2022).7 For example, owing to the reduced demand for local services by laid-off coal employees, communities in Appalachia experienced loss of retail and commercial occupations (Carley et al. 2018a; Lobao et al. 2016). In addition, the loss of fossil fuel jobs and production will impact local tax revenues (Pollin and Callaci 2019). If not implemented equitably, the energy transition will have a detri- mental impact on the culture, identity, and sense of place of these communities. OVERCOMING BARRIERS FOR A JUST ENERGY TRANSITION Decarbonization measures can reduce GHG emissions while simultaneously provid- ing new career opportunities, improving public health, increasing energy accessibility and affordability, and reducing energy justice disparities (NASEM 2021, 2023). For the transition to be a success, intentional learning from past projects, engagement with all stakeholders, and the inclusion of input into the development and implementation of transition programs and policies are needed (Krieger 2022). Operationalizing Energy Justice in the U.S. Transition Operationalizing the energy justice principles at all levels of policymaking and pro- gram development is critical for the energy transition to have equitable outcomes. The multistep process starts with eliciting community values and aspirations as well as defining equitable goals and results in the creation of measurable progress (Aguayo 2022). The energy justice principles need to be systemically and effectively incorpo- rated into the planning, implementation, and evaluation of decarbonization policies. Occasionally, this will result in incremental changes to existing practices and pro- grams; at other times, it will require across-the-board restructuring of plans. Policies will need to be adjustable and responsive to the goals and needs of individual com- munities that have different histories, experiences, and priorities. Across all four dimensions examined in the previous section—energy affordability; acces- sibility, acceptability, and adoption; public health and community resilience; and jobs and workforce development—disadvantaged communities would benefit most from actions 7  See Chapter 4 for more about the impacts the transition will have on workforce and Chapter 12 for the impacts the transition will have on the on the fossil fuel industry. 101 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 101 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S that thoroughly and consistently communicate the available decarbonization programs and technologies, the purpose and goal of each option, and the benefits and costs of each option. For instance, programs directed toward disadvantaged community needs can include (1) making home visits to support maintenance and energy-efficient upgrades or retrofits aimed at reducing indoor pollution or other environmental health issues; or (2) preventive safety aid, information, and training to support the safe installation of clean energy technologies. Table 2-2 gives examples of how the energy justice principles can be put into practice to produce equitable program outcomes. Impacted communities also benefit from programs that address emissions mitigation and additionally provide other direct, long-term benefits. For example, the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and DOE are piloting demonstra- tions for housing interventions that combine the Lead Hazard Reduction Healthy Homes programs and the WAP (HUD 2023). Through the exclusive engagement of low-income households and a coordinated assessment of outcomes, HUD and DOE hope to determine if the streamlined delivery of home services achieve cost effective- ness and meet public health and energy efficiency objectives. Future decarbonization programs that prioritize engagement from communities most impacted by the cur- rent energy system and provide multifaceted, long-term solutions and benefits help address all three tenets of energy justice. Stakeholder’s Environmental Justice Concerns Several environmental justice and energy justice organizations have raised con- cerns about aspects of recent decarbonization policies and their impacts on the environment and on disadvantaged communities. Although advocates acknowl- edge the positive investments in air pollution monitoring, urban tree planting programs, and measures that address legacy harms and climate change, there are concerns that some investments “are not aligned with centering overburdened communities in decision-making or transitioning away from fossil fuels” (We Act for Environmental Justice 2022). For example, a study of communities with bio- fuel development showed that newly funded energy facilities did not create the levels of employment promised, but instead led to issues of water availability and quality, road damage, and livestock feed cost increases within these communities (Kulcsar et al. 2016). In a letter to DOE Secretary Granholm, the Environmental Justice Leadership Forum (EJLF), a national coalition of environmental justice leadership, states “[e]nergy sources should not be classified as ‘clean’ if they increase pollution burden, expand fossil fuel reliance or infrastructure, or exacerbate health risks” (EJLF 2022, p. 2). The EJLF 102 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 102 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity TABLE 2-2  Operationalizing Energy Justice in Energy-Relevant Programs Principle Operationalization Program Suggestions Recognitional Incorporate baseline assessments • Clearly define the vulnerable and Equity of existing environmental burdens disadvantaged groups a program and harms on local communities and intends to benefit and engage with. ensuring that clean energy projects • Design programs, community- and investments do not further add adapted strategies, and capacity- to those burdens, and if they do, the building methods tailored to specific project location and scale should be disadvantaged groups. reconsidered. • Prioritize emissions reductions in vulnerable areas. Procedural Embrace all four themes of procedural • Provide real-time information about Equity justice—participation, information, peak energy use rates to change fair decision-making, and local context behavior and save money on energy (Elmallah and Rand 2022)—while bills. centering local knowledge and concerns • Create pilots and examples of how in project development. investment in technology works at the neighborhood-level and communicate outcomes. • Develop simplified application forms and increase communication between programs to allow for one qualification to authorize another. • Build trust with homeowners and community members. Distributional Design policies and programs that (1) • Develop programs that offer home Equity compensate communities negatively visits to support maintenance or impacted by the energy transition; retrofits. (2) reduce energy costs and burdens • Provide training on transition of low-income households; (3) ensure technologies and preventive safety equitable distribution of the benefits information. of clean energy technologies while • Develop tailored funding assistance avoiding harms to communities; and for new technology purchases (4) ensure participation of people of and reducing energy burdens for color and individuals from under-served disadvantaged communities. communities in jobs in the growing • Develop training, financing, and clean energy economy. educational programs for transition and clean energy jobs that are tailored to specific communities. 103 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 103 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S proposes that certain actions be taken to address community impacts and concerns if such technologies continue to be supported. They endorse developing robust com- munity engagement prior to the creation of implementation strategies; conducting a comprehensive analysis prior to funding to understand and minimize adverse impacts of the project or program; and listening sessions to learn of the actual community impacts with the goal of actionable remediation of concerns (EJLF 2022). Social life-cycle assessment (S-LCA) is an emerging analysis technique that lever- ages life-cycle assessment’s full accounting of a technology or system’s inflows, outflows, and quantification of impacts throughout its full life cycle. While LCA has typically been used to quantify environmental impact categories, social and equity impacts are present in the system and outcomes being assessed, even if not noted explicitly (Bozeman et al. 2022). S-LCA creates a connection between the established methodological approaches for life-cycle accounting with impact categories for equity, societal, and justice-related outcomes. Significant concerns have been raised regarding decarbonization transition technologies and practices that may have a higher risk of harms to disadvantaged communities and the communities that host the infrastructure required for these technologies.8 These include technologies that: manage carbon such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon utilization; produce non-fossil energy carriers such as hydrogen and biofuels; generate electric- ity like nuclear power generation; and enable other decarbonization technologies, like pipelines and mining (EJLF 2022). The underlying concerns associated with these technologies range include the following: 1. Direct environmental impacts of siting industrial infrastructure in or near disadvantaged communities; 2. Direct societal impacts from community participation in siting decisions; 3. Indirect impacts of enabling continued fossil fuel development and combustion; and 4. Reliance on future implementation of negative emissions technologies that may not come to fruition. Box 2-2 presents the equity impacts of CCS that may have direct and indirect environmental and social impacts on communities. In this light, recent federal decarbonization policies within the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (P.L. 117-58) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) (P.L. 117-169) fail to fully address the fact that disadvantaged communities face disproportionate impacts from the fossil fuel industry. For example, IIJA includes provisions for nuclear energy 8  For more about the health considerations for communities that host extraction operations, see Chapter 3. For more about community energy and collective benefits for communities, see Chapter 5. 104 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 104 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity BOX 2-2 EQUITY IMPACTS OF CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE Although decarbonization technologies will reduce GHG emissions, they will have different impacts on communities owing to varying environmental, health, and quality of life benefits and harms. CCS will not likely be a first choice for emissions reduction from emitting processes because other low-emission generating resources are lower cost and avoid both GHG emissions and local air pollution. However, there are instances where the net benefits mean that CCS is the best option to reduce facility emissions. For example, CCS can be used to mitigate or offset the emissions of industrial processes with limited non-emitting options, such as the production of cement or plastics. The examination of CCS illustrates both the direct and indirect environmen- tal and energy justice impacts that have to be addressed for decarbonization technologies to contribute to a just energy transition. CCS is discussed in detail in Chapter 10. CCS is a technological approach to carbon management that collects and often concentrates CO2 from waste gas streams of combustion or other industrial processes or from the atmosphere or oceans. Captured CO2 is then stored so that it cannot accumulate in the atmosphere and lead to climate change. CCS technologies may be well suited to mitigating GHGs and other pollutants. A recent study by the Energy Futures Initiative, citing work by the Clean Air Task Force, estimates a 10–96 percent reduction in local air pollutants associated with the gas pretreatment and capture processes required for operation of a CCS project applied to a cement plant (Brown et al. 2023). A study of the technical requirements for, and the costs and benefits of capturing health-harming co-pollutants along with CO2 capture showed that for all industries examined, there are positive health benefits (Bennett et al. 2023). CCS technologies that combust fuels in pure oxygen, such as oxy-fuel combustion facilities, also reduce NOx and SOx emissions (NETL 2023). The reduction of local air pollutants from fossil fuel combustion is discussed in detail in Chapter 3. Key benefits of CCS facilities include systemic benefits such as GHG mitigation, and the ability of power plants to operate on a dispatchable basis and support around-the-clock generation, as well as community benefits such as workforce development, tax and other community revenues, and for many capture technologies implemented on flue gas streams, significant reductions in local health-harming air pollutant emissions. However, CCS processes can have direct and indirect environmental risks, including potentially polluting local air and water sources from CO2 capture, transportation, or storage processes. Additionally, CCS technologies also pose the risk of displacing an alternative technology that produces no emissions, such as power generation from solar or wind. Environmental justice groups have expressed concerns about the potential of CCS technologies and infrastructure, including direct air capture, to perpetuate harms to disadvantaged communities (e.g., see Amsalem and Bogdan Tejeda 2022; Chemnick 2023; Climate Justice Alliance 2023; Natter 2023). As investments continue to be made, CCS technologies will need to enhance benefits and reduce or mitigate harms to equitably serve affected communities, including potentially producing value for the community through community ownership of facilities and workforce development opportunities. Additionally, transparency is needed about the benefits, harms, and trade-offs during project planning, development, siting, and permitting, as well as operation and closure, especially when impacting disadvantaged communities (CEQ 2022). Both community engagement and trans- parency adhere to the procedural equity principle. Furthermore, the incorporation of energy justice principles into CCS implementation will increase the opportunity for distributional equity by ensur- ing that benefits will be experienced by host communities. Chapter 5 discusses the role of public engagement for host communities to determine expected benefits and risks. 105 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 105 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S and logging on public lands and IRA facilitates the potential continued investment in oil, methane-derived hydrogen, and biofuel as energy sources. There are concerns that these investments do not prioritize GHG emissions mitigation, which could lead to increases in pollutants and hazardous waste in communities already suffering the great- est impacts of fossil fuel combustion. For more information about the IIJA and IRA, see the section “Assessment of Recent Federal Actions.” Furthermore, environmental justice groups are wary that federal agencies may be slow to identify disadvantaged communities’ priorities and needs, which will slow the de- livery of equitable benefits (Walls 2022). Organizations have also focused on equitable implementation, including the need for local, state, and community capacity-building to support disadvantaged communities and community-based organizations as they apply for funding and access technical assistance (Walker et al. 2022). This could be done through the incorporation of procedural justice principles into the monitoring of funding allocation and recognitional justice provisions to include affected communi- ties in program design. Effective implementation can be further achieved through the increase in interagency coordination. See the section “Building Community Capacity to Develop Community-Driven Programs” for more information about coordination. Finding 2-1: It is critical that the energy transition to a net-zero future be just, mini- mizing harm and fostering equity across all populations, regions, and economies of the country. To achieve this, stakeholders, especially disadvantaged community members, need to be engaged when defining where, when, and how to prioritize federal and state resources and investments during the energy transition. Inclu- sive and equitable approaches, moreover, are key to preempting or minimizing the potential for implementation challenges or the derailment of decarbonization projects altogether. FEDERAL ACTIONS, GAPS, AND RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS The committee’s first report included findings and recommendations on the need to advance decarbonization in 2021–2030 (NASEM 2021). Recommendations focused on an equitable and just energy transition include the following: • The establishment of a 2-year National Transition Taskforce to assess vulner- ability of labor sectors and communities to the transition; • The establishment of a White House–level Office of Equitable Energy Transitions; • The establishment of an independent National Transition Corporation to ensure coordination and funding in the areas of job losses, critical infrastructure, and equitable access to economic opportunities and wealth; 106 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 106 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity • The creation of public energy equity metrics; • The establishment of educational and training programs to train the net-zero workforce, with reporting on diversity of participants and job placement success; and • The increase of research, development, and deployment in clean energy and net-zero transitions that integrates equity metrics. The committee continues to find these recommendations relevant, even considering the new legislative and executive actions. This section will review and assess what has been done on energy justice and equity at the federal level since the release of the first report and will propose solutions for identified gaps. Assessment of Recent Federal Actions Significant steps have been taken by the federal government to support the nation’s decarbonization agenda. By going beyond a narrow focus on GHG emissions mitigation to include quality jobs, public health, and environmental justice, these efforts open unique opportunities to leverage synergies and intersections between the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations9 and the advancement of U.S. climate ambitions. The recent federal actions to reduce GHGs present multiple opportunities for equity and justice co-benefits with goals to reduce both fossil fuel use and air pollution from combustion. See Chapter 3 for a detailed discussion of the co-benefits, positive additional health impacts of decarbonization policies, of climate mitigation policies. However, continued conscious and targeted efforts are needed to move away from past and current inequitable social structures and constraints. Executive Orders Executive Order 13985 Executive Order (EO) 13985—Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government—was signed to develop a whole- of-government equity agenda that requires federal agencies to assess whether and to what extent their programs and policies target barriers to opportunities and 9  The2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted by members of the United Nations in 2015. The document details 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that recognize that climate change strategies that improve health, reduce inequalities, and foster economic growth must also end poverty and other deprivations (UN n.d.). For implementation progress reports for the SDGs, visit https://sdgs.un.org/goals. 107 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 107 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S benefits for underserved communities10 (EO 13985 2021). EO 13985 defines the role of the White House Domestic Policy Council as coordinating the formulation and implementation of domestic policy objectives and coordinating efforts to embed equity principles, policies, and approaches across the federal government. Reflective of the recognitional and procedural equity principles, EO 13985 requires the heads of federal agencies to evaluate opportunities to increase coordination, communication, and engagement with community-based organizations, including through a par- ticipatory process with members of historically underrepresented and underserved communities (EO 13985 2021). It also establishes the Interagency Working Group on Equitable Data (Equitable Data Working Group) to consult with agencies and provide recommendations on inadequacies in existing federal data collection programs, policies, and infrastructure. The work done by the Equitable Data Working Group will be critical for a national assessment of the progress made toward a just energy transi- tion. See the section “Evaluation of the Just Energy Transition” below for more detail. Executive Order 14008 Adding to the whole-of-government equity agenda, EO 14008—Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad—created a comprehensive approach to addressing envi- ronmental justice concerns by establishing the following groups (EO 14008 2021): • National Climate Task Force to “facilitate planning and implementation of key Federal actions to reduce climate pollution; increase resilience to the impacts of climate change; protect public health; conserve our lands, water, oceans, and biodiversity; deliver environmental justice; and spur well-paying union jobs and economic growth.” • Interagency Working Group on Coal and Power Plant Communities and Economic Revitalization to “coordinate the identification and delivery of Federal resources to revitalize the economies of coal, oil and gas, and power plant communities.” • White House Environmental Justice Interagency Council to “develop clear perfor- mance metrics to ensure accountability and publish an annual public perfor- mance scorecard on its implementation.” • White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC) to provide rec- ommendations to the White House Environmental Justice Interagency Council “on how to increase the Federal Government’s efforts to address current and historic environmental injustice.” 10  Within the language of the EO, the term “underserved communities” refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life. 108 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 108 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity The establishment of each of the above groups supports the application of the recog- nitional and distributional equity principles to federal legislation. For instance, each group provides the opportunity for the benefits and burdens of climate policy to be identified during the development of legislative actions and after implementation. Furthermore, all groups recognize the disparity of climate change impacts, and their goals focus on certain groups of communities impacted most by climate change.11 As mandated by EO 14008, the Chair of CEQ, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the National Climate Advisor published recommendations in consultation with the WHEJAC and affected disadvantaged communities “on how certain federal investments might be made with a goal that 40 percent of benefits flow to dis- advantaged communities” (EO 14008 2021). The published recommendations included implementation guidance for the Justice40 Initiative and its related covered programs that are federal programs investing in one or more of seven areas: climate change, clean energy and energy efficiency, clean transit, affordable and sustainable housing, training and workforce development, remediation and reduction of legacy pollution, and the de- velopment of critical clean water and wastewater infrastructure (Young et al. 2021). The procedural equity principle is evident in the Justice40 Initiative through the requirement for guidelines to be designed through the consultation of affected communities and requirement for covered programs to engage in stakeholder engagement. Executive Order 14091 EO 14091—Further Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government—details the progress made to ad- vance equity and what remains to be done (EO 14091 2023). It recognizes the strides made to incorporate equity into the federal actions and acknowledges that some communities, especially underserved and rural communities, are still facing barriers accessing and benefiting from federal programs and policies. To fill the gap, EO 14091 requires federal agencies to submit annual Equity Action Plans12 enumerating 11  As part of EO 14008, OMB was directed to publish an annual Environmental Justice Scorecard (EJ Scorecard) (EO 14008 2021). Phase One of the EJ Scorecard, released in early 2023, provides a baseline assessment of federal action in 2021 and 2022 that support the nation’s environmental justice goals, in- cluding progress toward the Justice40 Initiative. To view the EJ Scorecard and its initial baseline report on 24 federal agencies, see https://ejscorecard.geoplatform.gov/scorecard. 12  The Urban Institute has reviewed the 2022 equity action plans of 24 federal agencies published in response to EO 13985 and compiled a collection of analyses and recommendation to support the 2023 equity plans mandated by EO 14091. For each agency reviewed, there is a two-page summary of the principles, pillars, and metrics for equity that are included in the equity action plan. To view these summaries, see Urban Institute (n.d.). 109 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 109 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S implementation barriers to equitable policy outcomes and providing strategies to address barriers that advance equity through evidence-based approaches and reduce administrative burdens (EO 14091 2023). The order also focuses on opportunities to strengthen partnerships with underserved communities and to help rural com- munities identify resources that build community wealth. Last, EO 14091 requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to report on the progress of federal equitable data practices. The continued focus on including equity frameworks into federal action will support the equitable implementation of recent and future net-zero policies and programs. Additionally, the availability of data regard- ing federal policies will support an evaluation of the energy transition (see the section “Evaluation of the Just Energy Transition” below). Executive Order 14096 EO 14096—Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All— identifies environmental justice as something the federal government is responsible for ensuring, stressing the right for every person to have “clean air to breathe . . . and an environment that is healthy and sustainable, climate-resilient” (EO 14096 2023). The order attempts to establish a government-wide approach to environmental justice by requiring federal agencies to: • Identify and address disproportionate, adverse health and environmental effects of federal activities, including the cumulative impacts of burdens on communities; • Identify and address barriers that impair the ability of communities to receive equitable access to benefits, including those related to climate mitigation and resilience; • Consider adopting or requiring measures to avoid or mitigate adverse envi- ronmental and health effects of federal activities on communities; and • Provide opportunities for community engagement, including by fully consid- ering input provided during decision-making processes and providing techni- cal assistance. The act also requires agencies to carry out such reviews as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). See Chapter 5 for more information about NEPA and its impact on engaging the public in the energy transition. Federal agencies are mandated to submit to CEQ and make public an Environmental Justice Stra- tegic Plan detailing priority actions and metrics to address environmental justice 110 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 110 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity every 4 years (EO 14096 2023). This approach toward environmental justice and the requirement for agencies to make public their approach and metrics can be applied to the energy justice as the nation moves forward with the transition to a net-zero energy system. Limitations of Programs Initiated Through Executive Orders Recent executive actions present an innovative approach to addressing equity and justice concerns, especially through the Justice40 Initiative. This approach has the potential to be supported by the equity assessment focus of EO 13985 and future whole-of-government actions focused on energy justice can be modeled after the requirements for federal agencies in EO 14082. However, unlike legislation, executive orders only govern the conduct of the federal executive branch, including the federal agencies, and can be repealed by future administrations. Specifically, the Justice40 Ini- tiative and other equity-focused initiatives run the risk of being overturned or ignored following a change in presidential administration. The codification of a durable pro- gram allows for the outcome of the program to be evaluated and modified to better meet the target. Finding 2-2: EO 14008 presents an innovative approach to addressing environ- mental justice concerns by requiring that 40 percent of the benefits from covered programs go to disadvantaged communities. Because actions put in place by executive orders are not enacted through statute, there is a risk that a change in presidential administrations will result in these requirements being ignored. Specifically, without a more durable legislative mandate for the Justice40 Initiative or an alternative quantitative target, federal agencies may not honor the policy that programs be implemented in ways that directly benefit disadvantaged communities. Recommendation 2-1: Codify the Justice40 Initiative. Congress should enact legislation that codifies either the Justice40 Initiative or an alternative, equally stringent quantitative target to provide a clear standard that the entire federal government will use to measure progress against fairness, equity, and justice goals. Federal legislation should also require the collec- tion of and reporting on standardized metrics for measuring and evaluat- ing direct benefits and negative impacts on jobs, public health, energy affordability, and access to technologies for disadvantaged and frontline communities. 111 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 111 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S Legislation Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA),13 also commonly known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal, is a $1.2 trillion investment in the nation’s roads, bridges and rails, and targeted investments to advance environmental justice, tackle the climate crisis, and support community resilience (Tomer et al. 2021; White House 2021). The IIJA’s environmental and climate justice appropriations include $39 billion to modernize public transit (§11130, §11133, §11206, §11403); $21 billion to the environmental remediation of brownfield sites through the Superfund program (§80201); and a total of $64.41 billion for broadband infra- structure (§60201, §60401), access (§60102, §60304, §60305, §60105), and afford- ability (§60502). Additionally, the IIJA creates the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program to fund the design and planning of transportation infrastructure, and the demolition and reconstruction of infrastructure that had divided communities (§11509) and the Clean School Bus Program to transition existing school buses to clean and zero-emission school buses (§71101). It is estimated that $240 billion of the total appropriations will address environmental justice priorities (White House 2021). While the appropriations and authorizations of the IIJA do not specifically ad- vance energy justice, the intentional focus on investing in communities and ensuring effective implementation indirectly advance energy justice by aligning with the distributional equity principle. For example, EO 14052—Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act—requires agencies to equitably invest IIJA appropriations, including through the Justice40 Initiative (EO 14052 2021). To adhere to this, federal agencies released their estimates for Justice40 compliance; for example, EPA stated that more than 40 percent of its IIJA ap- propriations supported underserved communities by 2022 (EPA 2022b). If imple- mented appropriately, several IIJA provisions will lay the foundation for a just energy transition. 13  It should be noted that the IIJA and IRA are not equivalent in funding mechanisms. The IIJA consists of a mix of authorizations and appropriations while the IRA primarily consists of spending programs (ap- propriations) and tax expenditures. Appropriations are laws that provide money for government programs and must be passed by Congress every year in order for the government to continue to operate. Spending programs can allocate federal resources to projects and activities up to the amount of their appropriation. By contrast, tax expenditures, such as the production tax credits in the IRA, typically have no limit on the amount that could be claimed by taxpayers. 112 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 112 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Inflation Reduction Act The IRA includes large investments in clean energy technologies that will reduce the use of fossil fuels, lower energy costs for families, create good-paying jobs, and tackle the climate crisis (White House 2022a). The IRA directs nearly $400 billion in appro- priations and authorizations to clean energy, including to reduce carbon emissions and support environmental justice objectives (Elliot et al. 2022). Chi (2022) estimates $40 billion in appropriated funding will have direct and indirect impacts on disadvan- taged communities while supporters of the IRA claim that $60 billion in appropria- tions will go to environmental justice priorities (Walls 2022), but there is acknowl- edged ambiguity in the IRA’s tax credit provisions and a lack of clarity about what a direct benefit is which make calculations difficult to agree upon. See Appendix F for the committee’s evaluation of the impacts, direct and indirect, that the IRA’s appropri- ated funds and tax expenditures will have on underserved, low-income, and disadvan- taged communities. IRA spending programs that support fossil fuel reduction present multiple opportunities for equity and justice co-benefits. For example, the act includes appropriations to im- prove CEQ’s stakeholder and community engagement (§60402) and climate resilience investments in Indigenous communities (§80001). The IRA also creates a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to issue grants to state, local, regional, and tribal governments, and to non-governmental organizations that provide financial or technical support enabling under-resourced and disadvantaged communities to benefit from or deploy zero- emissions technologies (§60103). To support the implementation of specific provisions, EO 14082—Implementation of the Energy and Infrastructure Provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022—was signed to prioritize the implementation of IRA provisions that make progress toward reducing national GHG emissions and achieve a carbon- free electricity sector by 2035; advance environmental and climate justice; increase and improve equitable access to high-quality job opportunities; reduce energy costs while increasing energy security; and coordinate with non-federal and private-sector stake- holders to build sustainable and resilient communities (EO 14082 2022). Because the IRA statutory language was constrained by the budget reconciliation pro- cess, federal agencies are left responsible for the identification of key languages, pro- cesses, and requirements for awarding grants that would aid communities during the transition. For example, the IRA delegates to federal implementers the responsibility of defining “disadvantaged community” and “energy community.” As an example, since enactment of the IRA, the term “energy community” has been defined in at least two ways: one included in the statutory language in the IRA (U.S. Congress 2022) and one proposed by Resources for the Future that takes a scaled approach for some factors 113 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 113 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S to be more inclusive of different communities (Raimi and Pesek 2022). Additionally, the IRA leaves wide discretion to states to decide how some programs are designed, implemented, and assessed. See Appendix G for federal definitions of disadvantaged communities. See Chapter 13 for more discussion of the role of non-federal entities in the implementation of the IRA provisions. As mentioned earlier in the section “Stakeholders’ Environmental Justice Concerns,” there are concerns that federal agencies may be slow to identify the priorities of communities in need of decarbonization action. This concern is heightened by the multiplicity of ways to identify these communities. For example, EO 14008 tasked CEQ with the creation of the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) to help federal agencies identify disadvantaged communities14 (EO 14008 2021). However, many federal agencies with Justice40 covered programs had already developed their own screening tools by the time CEJST exited its beta phase. Appendix G summarizes the federal agencies with covered programs and compares their selected indicators with the ones released by CEQ in November 2022. Other federal agencies determined to have Justice40 covered programs without public or comprehensive definitions of disadvantaged communities include the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services, HUD, and the Department of Agriculture. Although there exists some overlap between the communities identified by various screening tools, it would be beneficial to the implementation and evaluation of out- comes from federal transition actions if there were core identifiers, used by all federal agencies as a foundation on which they can build for a program-specific definition of disadvantaged community. Finding 2-3: The ability to define and identify disadvantaged communities is essential to measure the direct impacts of federal policies and programs on disadvantaged communities. However, the evaluation of the federal decarbon- ization action, especially the Justice40 Initiative, is constrained by the lack of a robust definition of disadvantaged communities and centralized screening tools to map these communities. The committee recognizes that there cannot be a single definition for disadvantaged communities that applies to all programs because federal and state programs may have different target populations and related burden indicators for target population identification. However, the mul- tiplicity of non-compatible definitions, including the one used for the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, makes it difficult to accurately measure 14  As of March 2023, CEQ’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool Version 1.0 is one of more than 30 environmental justice screening tools across federal, state, and local agencies (Dean and Esling 2023). For more information about how these screening tools intersect, see the Environmental Policy Innovation Center’s EJ Tools Map at https://epic-tech.shinyapps.io/ej-tools-beta. 114 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 114 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity the impacts of federal actions, specifically on disadvantaged communities, across programs and agencies. It is important to advance a set of core metrics to identify disadvantaged communities to use in program design and evaluation, and decision analysis. Recommendation 2-2: Develop a Federal Baseline Set of Metrics for Disadvan- taged Communities for Program Design and Evaluation. To enable consistent program design and evaluation, the White House Council on Environmental Quality should develop a standardized set of core metrics for programs serv- ing disadvantaged communities to be used in all federal activities, to the extent feasible under statutes governing each agency. The use of the core metrics would be required, and agencies would be encouraged to select addi- tional context-specific metrics to match program needs. For federal programs that engage with states and localities with existing disadvantaged commu- nity metrics, the program design should include a rationale for why the state or local designations could be used in place of those recommended by the Council on Environmental Quality. Implementation of Federal Decarbonization Policies To avoid creating new or worsening existing burdens faced by disadvantaged com- munities, future federal actions need to make a concerted effort to equitably design and implement climate-related and decarbonization policy. Specifically, that it is critical policy makers include the equity principles when designing processes for the implementation of these polices. Recent executive-level actions—that is, EO 14052, EO 14082, and EO 14091—attempt to address the concerns of equitable design and implementation in federal policymaking in general. Additionally, although funded programs and services within the 2022 American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act (P.L. 117-2 2021) were designed to counteract the effects of COVID-19, the White House ARP Implementation Team developed the below equitable implementation actions that can be applied to all federal legislation (White House 2022a): • Establish program goals and measurable targets, and track program progress against these goals and targets. • Foster awareness and capacity to access programs and services, particularly among underserved individuals and communities. • Allocate and leverage resources and funding and design tools to spend resources equitably. • Collect and analyze sufficient data to determine whether and how disparities change across key outcomes and impact measures. 115 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 115 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S • Create feedback mechanisms for regular internal review, including soliciting feedback from underserved individuals and communities for continuous improvements. • Build on evidence to advance equity in program design and implementation. • Ensure that data are collected and strategies are evaluated to adapt and improve programs. Given that all decarbonization approaches have benefits and harms, policies need to be designed and implemented through inclusive and ongoing engagement such that they deliver those benefits and harms equitably and justly. Additionally, owing to the impermanence of executive orders, it will be critical for actions to support equitable implementation of federal actions to be made consistent and permanent. Finding 2-4: The decarbonization provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act are likely to slow the U.S. emissions that contrib- ute to climate change, primarily through reduced fossil fuel combustion, with local air quality benefits that are likely to have positive equity and justice impacts. Many provisions are also specifically directed at equity and justice, including block grants, subsidies to improve technology uptake, and top-up funding for projects in disad- vantaged communities. However, some provisions, such as those for offshore drill- ing and carbon capture and storage, do not align with environmental justice goals, including undermining climate mitigation goals and creating or continuing pollution that threatens public health and quality of life for disadvantaged communities. Recommendation 2-3: Implement Federal Legislation for Equitable Outcomes. Federal policy makers should include equity principles in the design and im- plementation of decarbonization policies. Specifically, policy makers should review the implementation actions as developed by the White House Ameri- can Rescue Plan Implementation Team and apply the actions to existing and future policies. Federal agencies should engage communities most impacted by energy inequities as key stakeholders to ensure that the voices of affected communities are meaningfully heard and develop policies and programs that are informed by and responsive to concerns raised. ENSURING EQUITABLE ACCESS TO AND OUTCOMES OF THE JUST ENERGY TRANSITION At the early stages of the implementation of decarbonization policy, it is critical that federal, state, and local authorities develop monitoring and evaluation mechanisms aimed to identify equity gaps in the development and implementation of acts, orders, 116 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 116 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity and other relevant action; outline areas for improvement; and hold federal, state, and local authorities accountable for implementing these activities. These requirements challenge federal, state, and local authorities to create sufficient institutional and fi- nancial capacity to implement programs and to develop a comprehensive assessment of the overall equity potential of these bills. This section highlights the barriers and solutions for community-led transition actions. It includes the bottom-up incorpora- tion of energy justice through transformation projects and the top-down coordination of transition resources. The section concludes with the critical role evaluation and adaptive management plays in ensuring the energy transition is just. Building Community Capacity to Develop Community-Led Transitions Strategies that prioritize place-based interventions can reduce disparities faster than sector-based decarbonization strategies (Wang et al. 2022). However, attempting federal-led and community-led decarbonization actions simultaneously will increase the success of the energy transition. To support all decarbonization action, human and fiscal capital must be available. In its first report, the committee recommended that Congress support actions to overcome barriers created by a lack of capacity-building including funding research to support the regional coordination of the transition; establishing equitable energy transition offices in each state; and funding community block grants for local decarbonization planning (NASEM 2021). Few congressional actions have directly focused on supporting community capacity in climate change mitigation except for the IRA (e.g., the Environmental and Climate Justice Block Grants [§60201]). However, many state and federal initiatives have been launched to advance capacity building and provide support to communities in need. There is also a role for nongovernment entities, to support holistic community transition programs. State Initiatives Despite the challenges produced by the complex political landscape of the United States, states and cities that have taken climate-mitigation actions represent two- thirds of the nation’s population and economy (Zhao et al. 2022). In fact, many states have adopted holistic, community-driven approaches to develop and implement transition solutions. For example, Louisiana’s Strategic Adaptations for Future En- vironments (LA SAFE) program integrates risk-mitigation planning for stormwater management, housing, transportation, economic development, education, recre- ation, and culture for holistic community resilience solutions (LA SAFE 2019). New York State passed the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act supporting 117 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 117 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S an equitable and inclusive transition focused on distributing no less than 35 percent of clean energy benefits of spending to disadvantaged communities (S.B. No. S6599 2019). From this legislation, the Cap-and-Invest Program was established to “apply a price to the amount of pollution” with proceeds supporting critical investments in “climate mitigation, energy efficiency, clean transportation, and other projects” that ensure that the program is affordable for all state citizens and delivers benefits to disadvantaged communities (Cap-and-Invest n.d.). See Chapter 13 for more about incentivizing state action to support climate-mitigation at local and regional levels. Drawing lessons and best practices from existing programs and adapting them to different state and regional contexts could prove beneficial for the nation’s energy transition. For example, California’s Transformative Climate Communities Program (TCC) invests in community-led transformation by funding development and infra- structure projects that have multiple environmental, health, and socioeconomic ben- efits. Box 2-3 describes the key features of TCC, which include targeting disadvantaged communities for the funding of transformation projects and requiring the evalua- tion of funded project through their completion. Although not all states have similar financial structures and may not have the same climate priorities as California, TCC is a possible approach other states can adopt to their own energy transformation. Even with the development of innovative community programs and competitive funding, some communities may still struggle to access available opportunities owing to unclear or overburdensome application requirements, lack of time to apply for funding, or unawareness of funding opportunities available. For example, the adminis- trative burden of applying for funding—the time and cognitive load required to com- plete forms and acquire, collect, and submit supporting documents—often prevents participation from under-resourced communities in decarbonization programs or increases the occurrence of temporary solutions that may not sufficiently address the community’s priorities (NASEM 2023b). Barriers to the access of funding and programs need to be sufficiently considered during the development and implementation of new transition programs for equitable access and outcomes. A human-centered, bottom-up approach that considers and appropriately incorpo- rates community concerns and priorities would be reflective of the procedural equity principle (NASEM 2023b). However, as mentioned in Box 2-3, two key challenges of developing community-driven programs and multi-stakeholder partnerships are overcoming feelings of mistrust between historically underserved communities and different levels of government and securing sufficient and continued program fund- ing. Political polarization and feelings of disrespect drive distrust and disengagement, but these can be overcome with pragmatic understanding of how people define their 118 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 118 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity BOX 2-3 CALIFORNIA’S TRANSFORMATIVE CLIMATE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM The Transformative Climate Communities Program (TCC) empowers communities most impacted by climate change to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to reduce green- house gas emissions and local air pollution. Funded by the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, TCC is directed by California Assembly Bill 2722 to make at least 35 percent of climate change investments in the state’s disadvantaged communities, low-income communities, and low-income households (A.B. No. 2722; California Climate Investments n.d.). All project areas, which are no more than 5 square miles, must include census tracts that are within the top 25 percent of disadvantaged communities (SGC 2023). The process is largely community-led with continued support from the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) which guides applicants in their selection of recommended strategies and development of a proposal for at least three projects that address the SGC objectives: (1) reduce greenhouse gas emissions; (2) improve public health and environmental benefits; and (3) expand economic opportunity and shared prosperity (SGC 2021). Once a project is approved, implement- ing TCC facilitates the development of relationships between project areas, implementers, and the SGC that incorporates trust. In such a multi-faceted process, there “has to be continuing trans- parency and accountability” between all partners involved so that the history of a community cannot be ignored in the development and implementation of community-level improvement projects (Saunders 2023). Table 2-3-1 highlights Transform Fresno and the anticipated benefits of the selected projects. TABLE 2-3-1  Transform Fresno Funded Projects and Anticipated Outputs, Outcomes, and Impacts Transformative Climate Communities Program Anticipated Outcomes and (TCC) Funded Projects Anticipated Outputs Impacts • Active Transportation • 57 new housing units • 20,816 metric tons of avoided • Affordable Housing • 42 new battery-electric vehicles for a GHG emissionsa and Sustainable car-sharing network • 14,832,662 miles of averted Communities • 1,458 new street trees travel in passenger miles • Food Waste Prevention • 784 kW of solar power on affordable • $4,826,413 in energy cost and Rescue multi-family and single-family savings for solar PV and street • Low Carbon homes tree beneficiaries Transportation • 200 TCC area individuals trained for • 337 direct jobs, 112 indirect • Rooftop Solar and residential solar installation projects jobs, and 190 induced jobs Energy Efficiency supported by TCC funding • Urban and Community Forestry • Urban Greening a Measured in CO2e. SOURCE: Committee generated from Luskin Center for Innovation (2022). continued 119 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 119 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S BOX 2-3  Continued Each grant recipient is required to designate a third-party Evaluation Partner to conduct an analysis of the process, outcome, and impact of selected strategies by gathering both quantita- tive data and qualitative feedback (SCG 2021, 2023) which is then communicated to stakeholders and policy makers. Evaluation reports have shown that once trust is established, the speed of progress on implementing projects, including those not funded through TCC, significantly in- creases. Additionally, implementation challenges identified by evaluation include how to secure continued funding for the projects and how to overcome a community’s mistrust of the local government (NASEM 2023). The availability of evaluation results supports efforts to improve the design and implementation of current and future TCC supported projects (Luskin Center for Innovation 2020). TCC offers a blueprint for climate investments that help redress historic injus- tices through stakeholder and community decision-makinga in all aspects of the program design and implementation “to ensure grant funds provide direct, meaningful, and assured benefits to disadvantaged communities” (SGC 2023, p. 49). Additionally, the publicly available evaluation of project implementation allows the best practices of TCC to be reviewed and outcomes makes TCC good example for other states to review and potentially apply lessons learned to their own holistic community transformation programs. a The Strategic Growth Council provides a list of proven engagement methods that facilitate direct engagement and participation from community residents (see SCG 2023, Appendix C). problems and priorities while creating regional solutions that are designed to be rel- evant to local communities (Beckfield 2022). Creating institutions and programs with the human capacity to provide a space to give the community a voice and staff mem- bers to be able to listen and address concerns will be critical during the transition as community-focused mitigation programs are implemented. Furthermore, implement- ing programs with the appropriate amount of available financial and human resources will support the development of trust among stakeholders and increase opportunities for equitable outcomes. See Chapter 5 for more details on how to create and expand human capacity to listen to community concerns. Federal Initiatives The Federal Interagency Thriving Communities Network was developed to coordinate the planning, implementation, and technical support of initiatives funded and created by the IIJA, IRA, and ARP (DOT n.d.). It offers the opportunity for disadvantaged com- munities to access place-based technical assistance and capacity-building resources from a variety of federal agencies including DOE, the Department of Transportation 120 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 120 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity (DOT), and HUD. As part of the Federal Interagency Thriving Communities Network, the joint EPA-DOE Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Technical Assistance Center (TCTAC) Program works in coordination with DOT’s Thriving Communities Program to provide technical assistance for transformative projects and capacity- building to under-resourced and disadvantaged communities (DOT 2022; EPA 2023). The development of a single center offering both the EPA and DOT technical assis- tance programs will streamline access to training, assistance, and capacity building for underserved and disadvantaged community members.15 Federal support of community capacity-building and engagement is further evi- denced by DOE’s Inclusive Energy Innovation Prize, which incentivizes and rewards community-based pathways within disadvantaged communities with funding to implement and evaluate proposed plans (DOE 2023a). Additionally, DOE’s Clean Energy to Communities (C2C) Program provides communities with tailored assistance through three levels of engagement: (1) in-depth technical partnerships that provide “cross-sector modeling, analysis, and validation” and direct funding to help “teams of local governments, electric utilities, and community-based organization reach their goals and/or overcome specific challenges” through multi-year collaborations; (2) peer-learning cohorts that organize regular meetings for “small groups of local gov- ernments, electric utilities, or community-based organizations” to develop a collab- orative environment “to develop program proposals, action plans, strategies, and/or best practices on a predetermined clean energy topic”; and (3) short-term assistance through which technical experts are matched with communities “to help address near-term clean energy questions or challenges” (DOE-EERE n.d.). Non-Governmental Actors Non-governmental actors can influence transition policy and mitigation directly by funding community and state transformation initiatives that produce scalable and replicable solutions (Hale 2016) and indirectly by supporting research and dissemi- nation of best practices that build capacity and catalyze supportive political coali- tions (Chan et al. 2015). The committee’s first report acknowledged the critical role for nongovernment organizations, stating that they were key to mobilizing public support and instrumental to closing the funding gap for organizations supporting 15  In April 2023, EPA announced that 17 new TCTAC hosts that would receive at least $10 million each to remove barriers to accessibility for underserved and under-resourced communities during the energy transition. The new partners include national organizations that have the capacity to assist tribes during the transition. For the complete list of the new regional and national TCTACs, see https://www.epa.gov/ newsreleases/biden-harris-administration-announces-177-million-17-new-technical-assistance-centers. 121 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 121 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S communities in addressing climate change (NASEM 2021).16 These organizations include colleges and universities, philanthropic foundations, and nonprofit organiza- tions, as well as state, local, and tribal governments. They are essential to the energy transition because they can address areas where there is no market solution and focus on promoting equity and energy justice (Lewis 2022). The philanthropic sector can help ensure that decarbonization policies are devel- oped and implemented justly in addition to providing financial support for projects and programs. Through the funding of projects, activities, and initiatives, founda- tions can shape transition action and the development of best practices that focus on the theory of change, a description of how or why a desired change will happen in a specific context that is used as a framework for project planning, implementa- tion, and evaluation. Additionally, philanthropic organizations can be partners to society, government, and the private sector to accelerate the transition (DeBacker 2022) by taking on a critical role of influencing who is invested in and how much funding is dedicated during the transition (Beckman 2022). However, since project funding mostly goes to regions supportive of climate-mitigation strategies, the ef- fectiveness of philanthropic funding to motivate holistic change across the nation is lessened. An additional barrier is the transparency of climate funding allocation by non-gov- ernmental actors. Increased transparency for funding trends may increase the suc- cess of the just energy transition by making foundations appear more trustworthy to community organizations looking for funding. To better align with the principles of energy justice, funding needs to be more equally distributed to ensure com- munities most impacted by energy injustices to be involved in the development of local solutions. To address this challenge, the Donors of Color Network announced a Climate Funders Justice Pledge in 2021, which has participating foundations com- mit to give at least 30 percent of their funding to groups that are centered on racial and economic climate justice, similar to the Justice40 Initiative, with an optional commitment to transparency about where their funding goes (Donors of Color Network 2021). At the time of this writing, some of the nation’s biggest funders have not committed to being transparent about the percent of their dollars going 16  Followingthe release of the committee’s first report, the House Committee on Natural Resources held an oversight hearing to discuss how to provide communities targeted by the environmental justice movement with a voice to speak out against and support federal policies (Committee on Natural Resources 2022). During this hearing, the first report’s finding that decarbonization cannot be achieved without in- clusive policy was quoted to support the argument that justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion should be central to federal efforts. 122 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 122 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity to environmental justice organizations.17 Furthermore, Taylor and Blondell (2023) found that most of the funding from foundations goes to large environmental organizations with a small fraction going to environmental justice organizations and organizations with less than $1 million in annual revenues. In addition to providing support for community capacity building, a critical role for all non-federal actors will be to identify and communicate the areas of need during the energy transition. For example, these actors can contribute to strategizing about where federal-level interagency coordination is needed the most with the acknowl- edgement that some communities have already begun incorporating procedural justice into their energy transition or have already developed initiatives that have seen equitable outcomes for the transition to clean energy. Any additional support needed by these transitioning and transforming communities must not come at the expense of those who have not yet started energy transition activities. See Chapter 5 for more information about how these actors can support meaningful public engagement in decarbonization action and processes. Multi-Level Coordination to Support the Energy Transition As the committee emphasized in its first report, the lack of meaningful federal coor- dination of transition processes with local- and regional-scale institutions will impede efforts to address the needs and concerns of disadvantaged communities as decar- bonization programs expand in pace and scope (NASEM 2021). The current federal policy encourages regional and local planning that integrates energy into community- based and holistic approaches to address climate resilience, environmental justice, and economic opportunity in disadvantaged communities. However, increased multi-level coordination of existing programs would better support access to these programs and better ensure communities are not experiencing high administrative burdens to access funding. Additionally, stronger collaboration efforts between nongovernment and government actors are needed to ensure best practices and lessons learned are effec- tively communicated to increase the success of the energy transition. For example, as mentioned at the committee’s Pathways to a Just and Equitable Transition workshop, the benefit of the sovereign structure of native communities is that they can demonstrate successful just transition laws and policies with sufficient and continued financial sup- port from the federal government and philanthropic organizations (NASEM 2023b). See Chapter 5 for more information about the progress that tribal nations have made in the 17  For more information about the Climate Funders Justice Pledge and a living list of foundations who have committed to the pledge, see https://www.climate.donorsofcolor.org/whos-pledged. 123 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 123 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S development of energy sovereignty and energy security and related recommendations about how tribal knowledge should be used in decarbonization policy. To address the barrier of community capacity, the first report recommended the establishment of an independent National Transition Corporation (NTC) “to ensure coordination and funding in the areas of the areas of job losses, critical location infrastructure, and equitable access to economic opportunities and wealth creation” (NASEM 2021, p. 190). The proposed NTC features the capacity to build lasting, mean- ingful partnerships and trust with disadvantaged and transitioning communities through its mandate to provide technical assistance, relational and capacity-building, and financing functions. When paired with the joint EPA-DOE TCTAC Program or programs modeled after TCC, the NTC has the potential to fund programs that pro- vide place-specific technical assistance and programs that encourage community-led transformation projects. For these transformation programs to be successful, it will be important for regional actors to coordinate with the NTC to identify and prioritize community needs that are both unique and overarching. Finding 2-5: The development of meaningful federal coordination of transi- tion processes across local- and regional-scale institutions will support efforts to engage with and include disadvantaged communities as decarbonization programs expand in pace and scope. To this end, a National Transition Corpora- tion model would be a federal complement to state and community initiatives during the transition. By necessity, state- and local-level efforts need access to a range of perspectives and resources; this includes needing support from many different parts of the federal government and coordination with private and civil society actors. Furthermore, it is critical for implementers to understand the priorities of under-resourced communities, or risk friction that could prevent community participation in decarbonization programs. This is best achieved through a coordinated effort that continuously communicates lessons learned and best practices. Recommendation 2-4: Build Multi-Level Capacity to Support Community-Led Transitions. To enable a lasting and effective commitment to community-led solutions to energy transitions, Congress should: a. Authorize a National Transition Corporation (NTC) to consolidate resources, finances, technical assistance, and strategy in an entity with experienced, multi-sectoral leadership. NTC would have the scope to allocate funds in modes (duration, amount, program design) better aligned with the aspirations, needs, and constraints of commu- nities based on where they are in the energy transition. 124 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 124 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity b. Adequately fund, continue, and expand the Thriving Communities Technical Assistance Center (TCTAC) Program model so that every community, especially under-resourced communities, can access robust, evidence-based, and culturally competent technical assis- tance necessary to develop effective mitigation investment plans. TCTACs will act as the connector between NTC and regional or local organizations that need support during the transition. c. Create a program for states to facilitate holistic, community-driven mitigation projects in disadvantaged communities, called Climate Opportunity Zones (COZs). Modeled after California’s Transformative Climate Communities program, COZs would foster multi-stakeholder partnerships, planning, and investments that reduce greenhouse emissions and demonstrate co-benefits for the economy, workforce, and health. Finding 2-6: The current federal policy encourages regional and local planning that integrates energy into community-based and holistic approaches to address climate resilience, environmental justice, and economic opportunity in disadvan- taged communities. However, increased inclusive and equitable approaches to technical assistance can better support under-resourced communities in transi- tion and transformation programs. Inclusive and equitable approaches to techni- cal assistance, capacity-building, and program development are key to preempt- ing or minimizing the potential for implementation challenges or the derailment of projects altogether. Recommendation 2-5: Develop Equitable Technical Assistance Guidelines. The Federal Interagency Thriving Communities Network should work with state and local agencies to develop guidelines that make it easy to access and obtain technical assistance resources. These guidelines should be developed through an inclusive process that engages disadvantaged communities, stakeholders, and staff from local, state, and federal agencies. Further- more, the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Committee should review and advise these guidelines to ensure that they adhere to an equity framework. Evaluation of the Just Energy Transition The data collection of relevant metrics, evaluation of outcomes and progress, and communication of results are critical components of any effective policy action, especially when a new policy is first implemented. Evaluation of programmatic data 125 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 125 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S is critical for adaptive management and for planning action during the transition’s second 2 decades. Affected communities must be consulted during the design of the evaluative process for it to produce equitable measures that reflect and support their priorities. There is a need to assess if energy transition actions are resulting in equitable and just outcomes for the nation, especially for disadvantaged communities. All principles of energy justice need to be operationalized in evaluation with a twofold goal of (1) determining if policies are equitable in their design, development, impacts, and outcomes; and (2) establishing the process to monitor and revise program design and implementation. Adaptive management, an iterative learning process producing improved understanding and management over time, can help the nation stay on the trajectory to an equitable net-zero emissions goal while also being able to revise policies and rethink technologies that do not work as intended. Both the diversity of policies intended to promote equity and justice during the energy transition and their distribution across many agencies and locations increase the need for a single entity that monitors, aggregates, synthesizes, and translates equity metrics to evaluate these policies. See Chapter 1 for more about the need for comprehensive evaluation and adaptive management. Metrics serve multiple objectives such as holding decision-making publicly account- able, locating target populations, assessing policy design and development, or evalu- ating how disadvantaged communities are faring in the short term (outputs) and the long term (outcomes). The evaluation of metrics can also serve as justification for continued and increased financial support from federal agencies and philanthropic organizations. In support of efforts to develop an energy equity framework, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory conducted a literature review and identified three equity metric types (Tarekegne et al. 2021): • Target population identification metrics locate or describe a target population. The identification of relevant populations must happen at the beginning of the process. • Investment decision-making metrics measure the potential impact of invest- ments and assess the distributional effects of investments across groups. These metrics need to be considered during program and project design and can also be used to measure the short-term impacts on the target population. • Program impact assessment metrics measure the benefits that directly reach people. These metrics are analyzed after the implementation of a program or project and should continue to be collected to determine the performance and success of the program or project and the long-term impacts on the tar- get population. 126 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 126 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Furthermore, a review of 57 distinct equity metrics found 24 target population iden- tification metrics; 25 investment decision-making metrics; and 8 program impact assessment metrics (Tarekegne et al. 2021). The authors suggest that baseline equity measurements can be developed by collecting and analyzing demographic and energy-related metrics such as income, race, geographic location, energy access, energy affordability, access to renewable energy, and community engagement. Thus, equity metrics are fundamental to operationalize notions of justice into concrete at- tributes, determinants, or outcomes. To support an equity evaluation of the U.S. transition, the collection of data on the equity impacts of investments and the equity outcomes of programs is still needed because there are multiple screening tools to locate disadvantaged com- munities for targeted energy equity programs. Box 2-4 describes CEQ’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening, which identifies disadvantaged communities and will be used for the implementation of Justice40 covered programs, as an example of the iterative process of identifying target population identification metrics. Eq- uity data, especially sociodemographic data, will need to be standardized in addi- tion to being collected (Bozeman et al. 2022). Data collection for program impact assessment will support analyses of federal agency compliance with the Justice40 Initiative. The CEJST provides an opportunity to have one set of data for federal target popula- tion identification and investment decision-making. However, environmental justice advocates note that CEJST Version 1.0 does not explicitly consider racial demo- graphics as a factor for disadvantaged communities despite “evidence that race is the strongest and most consistent predictor of environmental burdens” (Sadasivam 2023). The absence of explicit mention of race in screening tools and program de- sign is common, even within programs designed to address environmental racism. At the federal level, race-neutral criteria are often selected to develop tools that will survive “legal challenges that would stymie their efforts” (Friedman 2022) (e.g., Su- preme Court ruling on the use of affirmative action in college admissions [Supreme Court Docket Number 20-1199 2023]). Although legal experts agree with the prag- matic approach to federal and state18 programs, advocates stress that discussions of 18  At the state level, the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen) does not include indicators of race, ethnicity, or age. However, the California Environmental Protection Agency analyzes and publishes supplemental reports on the relationship between screening tool scores, race, and ethnicity to show how accurately the screening tool identifies communities of color that are impacted by environmental injustices (CalEPA 2018). For more information, see R. Liévanos, 2018, “Retool- ing CalEnviroScreen: Cumulative Pollution Burden and Race-Based Environmental Health Vulnerabilities in California,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(4), https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph15040762. 127 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 127 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S BOX 2-4 CEQ’S CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE SCREENING TOOL To help federal agencies identify disadvantaged communities, EO 14008 directed the CEQ to create a Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST). CEQ released CEJST Version 1.0a in November 2022, which included updated datasets, categorizations, and features respond- ing directly to feedback received during the public comment period on the beta version and listening sessions (White House 2022b). Recommendations from the WHEJAC to add historic redlining data, identify Tribal Nations, display demographic information, and enhance data on climate vulnerability were also included in Version 1.0. However, this tool specifically excludes race and ethnicity as a consideration for vulnerability status; it is understood that these factors are excluded owing to potential legal challenges that would hinder the use of CEJST by federal agencies. CEJST Version 1.0 uses datasets for 30 burden indicators, which are organized into eight categories. See Figure 2-4-1 for a depiction of the eight burden categories and related in- dicators. A community is designated as disadvantaged if it is in a census tract scoring at or above the threshold for one or more burden indicators and is at or above the threshold for an associated socioeconomic indicator. Low income was the socioeconomic indicator for all categories, except for workforce, which used high school education. The current version of the tool identifies 27,251 census tracts as disadvantaged or partially disadvantaged (White House 2022b), meaning that 33 percent of the nation’s population is within a disadvantaged community. The CEJST will continue to be updated annually based on public feedback and information collected by the National Academies’ Committee on Utilizing Advanced Envi- ronmental Health and Geospatial Data and Technologies to Inform Community Investmentb (NASEM 2023a) with full transparency on the methodology and datasets supported by the U.S. Digital Service (White House 2022c). FIGURE 2-4-1  Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool burden categories and indicators. SOURCE: Data from Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool. 128 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 128 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity BOX 2-4  Continued During the beta phase of CEJST, OMB released a memo in July 2021 for the Heads of Departments and Agencies urging federal agencies with Justice40 covered programs to develop and publicize their own methodology for calculating the benefits of the programs accruing in disadvantaged communities (Young et al. 2021). This resulted in a majority of federal agencies with Justice40 covered programs developing their own screening tools (see Appendix G). How- ever, an addendum to the 2021 memo encouraged federal agencies to use CEJST Version 1.0 to identify disadvantaged communities for Justice40 covered programs and other federal programs where resources are directed to disadvantaged communities (Young et al. 2023). Additionally, CEQ encourages federal agencies to “use the entire list of disadvantaged communities identified by the CEJST as a starting point” while noting that agencies may use their own data to prioritize certain communities from the list (CEQ 2023b, p. 5). Thus, CEQ provides a ceiling list of disadvan- taged communities for federal agencies with covered programs to consider in the evaluation of program impacts. a View the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool at https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/ en/#3/33.47/-97.5. b For more about the National Academies’ Committee on Utilizing Advanced Environmental Health and Geospatial Data and Technologies to Inform Community Investment, visit the study’s webpage at https:// www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/utilizing-advanced-environmental-health-and-geospatial-data-and- technologies-to-inform-community-investment. justice must recognize race as a factor of inequities and that efforts without explicit focus on race will not ultimately prioritize disadvantaged communities of color for Justice40 programs (Friedman 2022; Sadasivam 2023). Navigating the political environment to create mapping tools and programs that identify the on-the-ground experiences of disadvantaged communities without explicitly using racial and eth- nic demographic data will impact what program evaluations will report as outcomes and impacts. There is still a need for program impact assessment data to be collected and ana- lyzed. EO 13985 tasks OMB to conduct a federal equity assessment of programs and policies through the consultation of the heads of agencies (EO 13985 2021). OMB found that the most promising evaluations of equity (1) consider historical legacies of disparities, prospective assessment of new interventions, and inclusive data initiatives—for example, developing and utilizing methodological innova- tions to impute missing data values, and methods that address equity in program eligibility; and (2) assess whether eligible groups receive benefits (OMB 2021). The report concludes with recommendations to federal, state, and local authorities 129 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 129 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S that support the continued exploration of equity evaluation practices, including the following: • Continually identify methods to assess equity for program improvement; • Prioritize the expertise, capacity, and capabilities to improve data collection and analysis for equity considerations; • Prioritize the expertise, capacity, and capabilities needed to engage stake- holders meaningfully; and • Sustain and institutionalize equity in planning and workforce initiatives. These recommendations provide a good foundation for the evaluation of programs and policies designed to support the just transition to a net-zero energy system.19 The Equitable Data Working Group is critical to determine what data federal agen- cies are already collecting, and what data needs to be collected for an overall review of equity and justice in the nation’s energy transition. EO 14091 requires OSTP to coordinate with the Equitable Data Working Groups to implement strategies that address federal capacity-building needs for the collection and assessment of pro- grammatic data (EO 14091 2023). Researchers have already noted the need for the consolidation of concepts relevant to the evaluation of equity, particularly for the use in life-cycle analyses (Bozeman et al. 2022). Both standardization of data prac- tices and chosen equity concepts will be important for the development of a just energy transition evaluation.20 This standardization can start at the federal level and support state and local development and use. Recent community-level initiatives also offer insights that can inform future programmatic and policy efforts to create a just energy transition through a bottom-up approach. However, as noted in the committee’s Pathways to a Just and Equitable Transition workshop, the communi- cation of these lessons learned will benefit from publicly accessible and standard- ized data (NASEM 2023a). For instance, metrics on energy costs, usage, and needs across different households and communities can provide critical guidance and best practices for the design of solutions that are most appropriate for the context of people’s lives. 19  In July 2023, DOE introduced its new Office of Energy Justice Policy and Analysis (OEJPA), which will collaborate with members of minority and disadvantaged communities to “achieve equity-centered Federal energy policy, research and development, and demonstration and deployment activities” (DOE n.d.). OEJPA will analyze the “socio-economic and environmental effects of energy programs, policies, and regulations” on communities and will additionally ensure Justice40 benefits flow to disadvantaged communities (DOE 2023b). 20  For a review of the consolidated knowledge about equity applications and a 10-step process for developing standard sociodemographic data practices, see Bozeman et al. (2022). 130 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 130 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Equity Evaluation of the Just Energy Transition A foundation exists for a cross-agency evaluation on decarbonization investments and outcomes for an equitable and just energy transition. To support adaptive man- agement of transition actions, a progressive assessment tool for the justice implica- tion of policies and programs and the future impacts of the energy transition may be required (Heath 2022). Examples of energy transition analyses from local, state, and global organizations include • Initiative for Energy Justice’s Energy Justice Scorecard, which assesses existing or proposed energy policy based on the tenets of energy justice (see Baker et al. 2019); • Maryland’s Just Transition Analysis, which models the impact of the transition on fossil-fuel-reliant industries and workforce (see Irani et al. 2021); • International Energy Agency’s Tracking Clean Energy Progress assessment, which categorizes components of the energy system based on whether they are on target for the 2050 net-zero scenario (see IEA 2023); and • World Benchmarking Alliances’ Just Transition Assessment, which focuses on the transition of companies to a low-carbon future (see WBA 2021). Empowering disadvantaged communities in decision-making will be critical to any equity evaluation to motivate actionable remediation in federal programs or imple- mentation processes that are not achieving the desired or promised equitable out- comes. To build on this foundation and make an evaluation digestible by affected communities and groups, streamlined information about the transition needs to be developed by a single entity and communicated to stakeholders through trusted, existing communication tools. Finding 2-7: A critical component of understanding and improving the energy transition is to evaluate policy design, process, outcome, and impact regarding en- ergy justice and equity. This understanding of equitable outcomes is an important aspect of a periodic evaluation of energy system decarbonization. For evaluations of equity, analysis of only quantitative data is insufficient. The analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data through participatory workshops, focus groups, and other elicitation techniques including the engagement of community stake- holders in their development, is critical to creating a comprehensive understand- ing of the implementation and outcomes of climate mitigation programs, and to redressing any failings of federal programs. Recommendation 2-6: Evaluate the Equity Impacts of the Just Energy Transition. A single entity should collect, analyze, and communicate the equity data of 131 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 131 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S federal program implementation and outcome. This evaluation should include quantitative and qualitative data and analysis, and selected metrics should be advised by the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council and community-level stakeholders. The communication of the evaluation results should include regular reviews of progress toward equitable decarbonization in the United States that explicitly address the trends in energy burden reduc- tion, workforce development and employment, community health and resil- ience. Additional impact and outcome metrics should be reported by federal agencies as relevant to specific decarbonization program and policy goals. THE FUTURE OF ENERGY JUSTICE BEYOND THE 2020S The nation’s transition to a decarbonized energy system will require a fundamental shift in the way the burdens, concerns, priorities, and benefits of affected groups are considered. A just energy transition will require planning, implementation, and evaluation processes to be collaborative with the public, especially with its disad- vantaged members, to support a bottom-up approach. Additionally, energy justice principles need to be incorporated into policymaking to achieve top-down integra- tion and implementation. Laying these foundations now through baseline definitions, equitable implementation, and capacity building is critical to ensuring a just energy transition. Implementing energy justice principles will require a significant shift in the timescales involved in and approaches to policymaking. Meaningful participa- tion, moreover, from all stakeholders takes time and new governance structures (see Chapter 5). Such collaborative processes determine how goals, barriers, burdens, and benefits are defined and evaluated. The integration of knowledge and expertise throughout policymaking and regulatory processes will be key to assuring procedural, recognitional, and distributional justice are incorporated into the nation’s just energy transition. Table 2-3 summarizes all the recommendations that appear in this chapter to support a just energy transition. 132 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 132 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ON ENERGY JUSTICE AND EQUITY TABLE 2-3a  Summary of Recommendations on Energy Justice and Equity Actor(s) Overarching Responsible for Sector(s) Objective(s) Categories Short-Form Implementing Addressed by Addressed by Addressed by Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation 2-1: Codify the Congress • Electricity • Equity Rigorous and Justice40 Initiative • Buildings • Health Transparent •  Land use • Employment Analysis and • Transportation Reporting • Industry Ensuring Equity, • Finance Justice, Health, •  Fossil fuels and Fairness of Impacts 2-2: Develop a Council on • Electricity • Equity Rigorous and Federal Baseline Environmental • Buildings Transparent Set of Metrics for Quality •  Land use Analysis and Disadvantaged • Transportation Reporting Communities for • Industry Ensuring Equity, Program Design • Finance Justice, Health, and Evaluation •  Fossil fuels and Fairness of • Non-federal Impacts actors 2-3: Implement Federal policy • Electricity • Public Rigorous and Federal Legislation makers • Buildings engagement Transparent for Equitable •  Land use •  GHG reductions Analysis and Outcomes • Transportation • Equity Reporting • Industry Ensuring Equity, • Finance Justice, Health, •  Fossil fuels and Fairness of • Non-federal Impacts actors Ensuring Procedural Equity in Planning and Siting New Infrastructure and Programs aThe text in this table was changed during editorial review to improve clarity and alignment with information in other sections of the report. continued 133 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 133 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S TABLE 2-3  Continued Actor(s) Overarching Responsible for Sector(s) Objective(s) Categories Short-Form Implementing Addressed by Addressed by Addressed by Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation Recommendation 2-4: Build Multi- Congress, National • Non-federal •  GHG reductions Ensuring Level Capacity Transition actors • Equity Procedural Equity to Support Corporation, • Health in Planning Community-Led Environmental • Employment and Siting New Transitions Protection Agency, • Public Infrastructure and Department of engagement Programs Energy, state Ensuring Equity, legislatures Justice, Health, and Fairness of Impacts Building the Needed Workforce and Capacity 2-5: Develop Federal • Electricity • Equity Ensuring Equitable Interagency • Buildings • Public Procedural Equity Technical Thriving •  Land use engagement in Planning Assistance Communities • Transportation and Siting New Guidelines Network, • Industry Infrastructure and White House • Finance Programs Environmental •  Fossil fuels Ensuring Equity, Justice Advisory • Non-federal Justice, Health, Committee actors and Fairness of (WHEJAC) Impacts 2-6: Evaluate the Omnibus entity, • Electricity • Equity Rigorous and Equity Impacts of WHEJAC • Buildings • Health Transparent the Just Energy •  Land use • Employment Analysis and Transition • Transportation Reporting • Industry Ensuring Equity, • Finance Justice, Health, •  Fossil fuels and Fairness of • Non-federal Impacts actors 134 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 134 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity REFERENCES A.B. No. (California Assembly Bill Number) 2722. 2016. “Transformative Climate Communities Program.” 2015–2016 Regular Session. https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20152016/AB2722. Aguayo, L. 2022. “Operationalizing Equity.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions | Pathways to an Equitable and Just Transition Workshop. July 26. https://www. nationalacademies.org/event/07-26-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states-technology-policy- and-societal-dimensions-pathways-to-an-equitable-and-just-transition-workshop. Agyeman, J., D. Schlosberg, L. Craven, and C. Matthews. 2016. “Trends and Directions in Environmental Justice: From Inequity to Everyday Life, Community, and Just Sustainabilities.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 41(1):321–340. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-090052. Amsalem, G., and V. Bogdan Tejeda. 2022. “EPA Urged to Reject Carbon Capture Projects in Central California.” Center for Biological Diversity. https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/epa-urged-to-reject- carbon-capture-projects-in-central-california-2022-06-29. Baker, S., S. DeVar, and S. Prakash. 2019. The Energy Justice Workbook. Initiative for Energy Justice. https://iejusa.org/ workbook. Bauer, G.R. 2014. “Incorporating Intersectionality Theory into Population Health Research Methodology: Challenges and the Potential to Advance Health Equity.” Social Science Medicine 110:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. socscimed.2014.03.022. Beckfield, D. 2022. “Addressing Social Barriers to Decarbonization.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions | Pathways to an Equitable and Just Transition Workshop. July 26. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/07-26-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states- technology-policy-and-societal-dimensions-pathways-to-an-equitable-and-just-transition-workshop. Beckman, D. 2022. “Opening Remarks.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions: Implementing a Just and Equitable Energy Transition—Philanthropic Perspectives. June 13. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/06-13-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states- technology-policy-and-societal-dimensions-implementing-a-just-and-equitable-energy-transition-philanthropic- perspectives. Bennett, J., R. Kammer, J. Eidbo, M. Ford, S. Henao, N. Holwerda, E. Middleton, et al. 2023. Carbon Capture Co-Benefits. Great Plains Institute. https://carboncaptureready.betterenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Carbon-Capture-Co- Benefits.pdf. Berthod, O., T. Blanchet, H. Busch, C. Kunze, C. Nolden, and M. Wenderlich. 2022. “The Rise and Fall of Energy Democ- racy: 5 Cases of Collaborative Governance in Energy Systems.” Environmental Management 71:551–564. https://doi. org/10.1007/s00267-022-01687-8. Besley, J.C. 2010. “Public Engagement and the Impact of Fairness Perceptions on Decision Favorability and Acceptance.” Science Communication 32(2):256–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547009358624. Bickerstaff, K., G. Walker, and H. Bulkeley. 2013. “Introduction: Making Sense of Energy Justice.” In Energy Justice in a Changing Climate: Social Equity and Low-Carbon Energy, K. Bickerstaff, G. Walker, H. Bulkeley, eds. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing. Birkmann, J., E. Liwenga, R. Pandey, E. Boyd, R. Djalante, F. Gemenne, W. Leal Filho, P.F. Pinho, L. Stringer, and D. Wrathall. 2022. “Poverty, Livelihoods and Sustainable Development.” Pp. 1171–1274 in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Ad- aptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergov- ernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781009325844.010. Boudet, H.S. 2019. “Public Perceptions of and Responses to New Energy Technologies.” Nature Energy 4(6):446–455. https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0399-x. Bouillass, G., I. Blanc, and P. Perez-Lopez. 2021. “Step-by-Step Social Life Cycle Assessment Framework: A Participatory Approach for the Identification and Prioritization of Impact Subcategories Applied to Mobility Scenarios.” Interna- tional Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 26:2408–2435. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11367-021-01988-w. 135 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 135 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S Bouzarovski, S. 2018. Energy Poverty: (Dis)Assembling Europe’s Infrastructural Divide. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69299-9. Bozeman III, J.F., E. Nobler, and D. Nock. 2022. “A Path Toward Systemic Equity in Life Cycle Assessment and Decision- Making: Standardizing Sociodemographic Data Practices.” Environmental Engineering Science 39(9):759–769. https:// doi.org/10.1089/ees.2021.0375. Brown, J.D., S. Carpenter, S.D. Comello, S. Hovorka, S. Mackler, and M.H. Schwartz. 2023. Turning CCS Projects in Heavy Industry and Power into Blue Chip Financial Investments. Energy Futures Initiative. https://energyfuturesinitiative.org/ wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/02/20230212-CCS-Final_Full-copy.pdf. Brown, M.A., A. Soni, A.D. Doshi, and C. King. 2020. “The Persistence of High Energy Burdens: A Bibliometric Analysis of Vulnerability, Poverty, and Exclusion in the United States.” Energy Research & Social Science 70:101756. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101756. Bullard, R.D. 2002. “Confronting Environmental Racism in the Twenty-First Century.” Global Dialogue 4(1):34–48. Bullard, R.D. 2004. “Making Environmental Justice a Reality in the 21st Century.” Sustain: A Journal of Environmental and Sustainability Issues 10:5–12. Burkett, M. 2008. “Just Solutions to Climate Change: A Climate Justice Proposal for a Domestic Clean Development Mecha- nism.” Buffalo Law Review 56:169–243. CalEPA (California Environmental Protection Agency). 2018. “Analysis of Race/Ethnicity, Age, and CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Scores.” California Environmental Protection Agency: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. https:// oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calenviroscreen/document-calenviroscreen/raceageces3analysis.pdf. California Climate Investments. n.d. “Cap-and-Trade Dollars at Work.” https://www.caclimateinvestments.ca.gov. Accessed March 15, 2023. Cameron, L., and B. van der Zwaan. 2015. “Employment Factors for Wind and Solar Energy Technologies: A Literature Review.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 45:160–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.001. Cap-and-Invest. n.d. “Reducing Pollution, Investing in Communities, Creating Jobs, and Preserving Competitiveness.” New York State. https://capandinvest.ny.gov. Accessed March 15, 2023. Carley, S. 2022. “Specialty Grand Challenge: Energy Transitions, Human Dimensions, and Society.” Frontiers in Sustainable Energy Policy 1. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsuep.2022.1063207. Carley, S., and D.M. Konisky. 2020. “The Justice and Equity Implications of the Clean Energy Transition.” Nature Energy 5(8):569–577. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0641-6. Carley, S., T.P. Evans, M. Graff, and D.M. Konisky. 2018a. “A Framework for Evaluating Geographic Disparities in Energy Transition Vulnerability.” Nature Energy 3(8):621–627. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0142-z. Carley, S., T.P. Evans, and D.M. Konisky. 2018b. “Adaptation, Culture, and the Energy Transition in American Coal Country.” Energy Research & Social Science 37:133–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.007. Carley, S., C. Engle, and D.M. Konisky. 2021. “An Analysis of Energy Justice Programs Across the United States.” Energy Policy 152:112219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112219. Carley, S., M. Graff, D.M. Konisky, and T. Memmott. 2022a. “Behavioral and Financial Coping Strategies Among Energy- Insecure Households.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119(36):e2205356119. https://www.pnas.org/ doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2205356119. Carley, S., D.M. Konisky, and T. Memmott. 2022b. Household Energy Insecurity Survey. Indiana University Energy Justice Lab. https://energyjustice.indiana.edu/doc/ejl-energy-insecurity-report-winter-2022.pdf. CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality). 2022. “Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration Guidance.” CEQ-2022-0001. Federal Register 87(32):8808–8811. CEQ. 2023. Instructions to Federal Agencies on Using the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (“CEJST Instructions”). Council on Environmental Quality. https://static-data-screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/data-versions/1.0/data/score/ downloadable/CEQ-CEJST-Instructions.pdf. CEQ. n.d. “Methodology.” Council on Environmental Quality. https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/methodology. Accessed March 15, 2023. Cha, J.M. 2020. Chapter 4, “Just Transition: Tools for Protecting Workers and Their Communities at Risk of Displace- ment Due to Climate Policy.” Pp. 147–175 in Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action Plan for 2030, C. Zabin, ed. University of California, Berkeley, Labor Center. https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/ putting-california-on-the-high-road-a-jobs-and-climate-action-plan-for-2030. 136 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 136 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Cha, M. 2022. “Challenges and Opportunities for a Just Transition.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions | Pathways to an Equitable and Just Transition Workshop. July 26. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/07-26-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states- technology-policy-and-societal-dimensions-pathways-to-an-equitable-and-just-transition-workshop. Chan, S., H. van Asselt, T. Hale, K.W. Abbott, M. Beisheim, M. Hoffmann, B. Guy, et al. 2015. “Reinvigorating International Climate Policy: A Comprehensive Framework for Effective Nonstate Action.” Global Policy 6(4):466–473. https://doi. org/10.1111/1758-5899.12294. Chemnick, J. “ ‘Down Your Throat’: Biden Pushes CCS on Polluted Places.” E&E News: Climate Wire. https://www.eenews. net/articles/down-your-throat-biden-pushes-ccs-on-polluted-places. Chi, S. 2022. “IRA: Our Analysis of the Inflation Reduction Act.” Just Solutions Collective. https://justsolutionscollective. org/solution/ira-our-analysis-of-the-inflation-reduction-act. Church, A., M. Frost, and K. Sullivan. 2000. “Transport and Social Exclusion in London.” Transport Policy 7(3):195–205. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00024-X. Climate Justice Alliance. 2023. “Climate Justice Leaders Denounce Carbon Capture and Storage Plans as Scams, Warn Reliance on Unproven Technology Exacerbates Climate Change and Environmental Injustices.” https://climate- justicealliance.org/cj-leaders-denounce-ccs-at-whejac. Committee on Natural Resources. 2022. “Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Environmental Policy-Making: The Role of Environmental Organizations and Grantmaking Foundations.” Oversight Hearing before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources. https://www.congress.gov/117/chrg/CHRG-117hhrg46811/ CHRG-117hhrg46811.pdf. Cong, S., D. Nock, Y.L. Qiu, and B. Xing. 2022. “Unveiling Hidden Energy Poverty Using the Energy Equity Gap.” Nature Communications 13(1):2456. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30146-5. Cook, J.T., D.A. Frank, P.H. Casey, R. Rose-Jacobs, M.M. Black, M. Chilton, S. Ettinger de Cuba, et al. 2008. “A Brief Indicator of Household Energy Security: Associations with Food Security, Child Health, and Child Development in U.S. Infants and Toddlers.” Pediatrics 122(4):e867–e875. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2008-0286. Cooper, B. 2016. Chapter 19, “Intersectionality.” Pp. 385–406 in The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, L. Disch and M. Hawkesworth, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Covington, K.L. 2009. “Spatial Mismatch of the Poor: An Explanation of Recent Declines in Job Isolation.” Journal of Urban Affairs 31(5):559–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2009.00455.x. Crenshaw, K. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics.” University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989(1):31. Crenshaw, K.W. 2017. On Intersectionality: Essential Writings. New York: New Press. Dean, B., and P. Esling. 2023. “CEJST Is a Simple Map, with Big Implications—and Attention to Cumulative Burdens Mat- ters.” Intersections. https://cnt.org/blog/cejst-is-a-simple-map-with-big-implications-and-attention-to-cumulative- burdens-matters. DeBacker, L. 2022. “Opening Remarks.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions: Implementing a Just and Equitable Energy Transition—Philanthropic Perspectives. June 13. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/06-13-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states-technolo- gy-policy-and-societal-dimensions-implementing-a-just-and-equitable-energy-transition-philanthropic-perspectives. Devine-Wright, P. 2005. “Beyond NIMBYism: Towards an Integrated Framework for Understanding Public Perceptions of Wind Energy.” Wind Energy 8(2):125–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.124. Devine-Wright, P., and H. Devine-Wright. 2009. “Public Engagement with Community-Based Energy Service Provision: An Exploratory Case Study.” Energy & Environment 20(3):303–317. https://doi.org/10.1260/095830509788066402. Dhamoon, R.K. 2011. “Considerations on Mainstreaming Intersectionality.” Political Research Quarterly 64(1):230–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912910379227. DOE (Department of Energy). 2023a. “Inclusive Energy Innovation Prize | American-Made Challenges.” https://american- madechallenges.org/challenges/inclusiveenergyinnovation/index.html. DOE. 2023b. “Introducing DOE’s Office of Energy Justice Policy and Analysis.” DOE Office of Economic Impact and Diversity. https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOEOEID/bulletins/35f0f6b. DOE. n.d. “Office of Energy Justice Policy and Analysis.” https://www.energy.gov/diversity/office-energy-justice-policy- and-analysis. Accessed March 15, 2023. 137 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 137 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S DOE-EERE (Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy). 2022. “Fact Sheet: Low-Income Energy Affordability Data (LEAD) Tool.” https://lead.openei.org/docs/LEAD-Factsheet.pdf. DOE-EERE. n.d. “Clean Energy to Communities (C2C) Program.” https://www.energy.gov/eere/clean-energy-communities- program. Accessed March 15, 2023. Donors of Color Network. 2021. “Donors of Color Network Launches Climate Funders Justice Pledge to Shift Millions to Environmental and Justice Groups Led by People of Color.” https://www.climate.donorsofcolor.org/donors-of- color-network-launches-climate-funders-justice-pledge-to-shift-millions-to-environmental-justice-groups-led-by- people-of-color. DOT (Department of Transportation). 2022. “Thriving Communities Program.” https://www.transportation.gov/grants/ thriving-communities. DOT. n.d. “Federal Interagency Thriving Communities Network.” https://www.transportation.gov/federal-interagency- thriving-communities-network. Accessed March 15, 2023. Drehobl, A., and L. Ross. 2016. Lifting the High Energy Burden in America’s Largest Cities: How Energy Efficiency Can Improve Low Income and Underserved Communities. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. Drehobl, A., L. Ross, and R. Ayala. 2020. How High Are Household Energy Burdens? An Assessment of National and Metro- politan Energy Burden Across the United States. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. E2 (Environmental Entrepreneurs). 2019. “Clean Jobs America 2019.” https://www.e2.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/ E2-2019-Clean-Jobs-America.pdf. EJLF (Environmental Justice Leadership Forum). 2022. “False Solutions in Justice40 Letter.” https://www.weact.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/09/EJLF-False-Solutions-in-Justice40-Letter-091922.pdf. Elliot, N.M., B.A. Viola, H. Coulter, I. Lane, J.D. Odintz, M. Franco, C. Armstrong, et al. 2022. “The Inflation Reduction Act: Summary of Budget Reconciliation Legislation.” Holland and Knight LLP. https://www.hklaw.com/-/media/files/ insights/publications/2022/08/080822inflationreductionactsummary.pdf. Elmallah, S., and J. Rand. 2022. “ ‘After the Leases Are Signed, It’s a Done Deal’: Exploring Procedural Injustices for Utility- Scale Wind Energy Planning in the United States.” Energy Research and Social Science 89(July):102549. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102549. Energy Equity Project. 2022. “Energy Equity Framework: Combining Data and Qualitative Approaches to Ensure Equity in the Energy Transition.” University of Michigan—School for Environment and Sustainability. https://energyequi- typroject.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/220174_EEP_Report_8302022.pdf. EO (Executive Order) 13985. 2021. “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” Federal Register 86:7009–7013. EO 14008. 2021. “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.” Federal Register 86:7619–7633. https://www.federal- register.gov/documents/2021/02/01/2021-02177/tackling-the-climate-crisis-at-home-and-abroad. EO 14052. 2021. “Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.” Federal Register 86:64335–64336. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/11/18/2021-25286/implementation-of-the-infrastructure- investment-and-jobs-act. EO 14082. 2022. “Implementation of the Energy and Infrastructure Provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.” Federal Register 87:56861–56864. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/09/16/2022-20210/ implementation-of-the-energy-and-infrastructure-provisions-of-the-inflation-reduction-act-of-2022. EO 14091. 2023. “Further Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Gov- ernment.” Federal Register 88:10825–10833. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/02/22/2023-03779/ further-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal. EO 14096. 88 Federal Register 25251 (April 21, 2023). “Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Jus- tice for All.” https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/04/26/2023-08955/revitalizing-our-nations- commitment-to-environmental-justice-for-all. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2009. “Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: Final Rule.” Federal Register 74(239):66496–66546. EPA. 2022a. “Learn About Environmental Justice.” https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental- justice. 138 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 138 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity EPA. 2022b. “Year One Anniversary Report: Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.” https://www.epa.gov/system/files/ documents/2022-11/V-4_BIL_FirstAnniversaryReport_Nov142022.pdf. EPA. 2023. “The Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Technical Assistance Centers Program.” https://www.epa. gov/environmentaljustice/environmental-justice-thriving-communities-technical-assistance-centers. Farley, C., J. Howat, J. Bosco, N. Thakar, J. Wise, and J. Su. 2021. Advancing Equity in Utility Regulation. GRID Modernization Laboratory Consortium. https://doi.org/10.2172/1828753. Friedman, L. 2022. “White House Takes Aim at Environmental Racism, But Won’t Mention Race.” The New York Times. Febru- ary 15. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/15/climate/biden-environment-race-pollution.html. Ge, M., J. Friedrich, and L. Vigna. 2022. “4 Charts Explain Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Countries and Sectors.” https://www.wri.org/insights/4-charts-explain-greenhouse-gas-emissions-countries-and-sectors. Goforth, T., and D. Nock. 2022. “Air Pollution Disparities and Equality Assessments of U.S. National Decarbonization Strate- gies.” Nature Communications 13(1):7488. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-35098-4. Goldsmith, L., V. Raditz, and M. Méndez. 2022. “Queer and Present Danger: Understanding the Disparate Impacts of Disasters on LGBTQ+ Communities.” Disasters 46(4):946–973. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12509. Guhathakurta, S., and P. Gober. 2007. “The Impact of the Phoenix Urban Heat Island on Residential Water Use.” Journal of the American Planning Association 73(3):317–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360708977980. Hale, T. “ ‘All Hands on Deck’: The Paris Agreement and Nonstate Climate Action.” Global Environmental Politics 16(3):12–22. Han, S. 2022. “Spatial Stratification and Socio-Spatial Inequalities: The Case of Seoul and Busan in South Korea.” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 9(1):23. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01035-5. Harlan, S.L., J.H. Declet-Barreto, W.L. Stefanov, and D.B. Petitti. 2013. “Neighborhood Effects on Heat Deaths: Social and Environmental Predictors of Vulnerability in Maricopa County, Arizona.” Environmental Health Perspectives 121(2):197–204. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104625. Harvey, D. 2008. “The Right to the City.” New Left Review (53):23–40. Hayden, M.H., H. Brenkert-Smith, and O.V. Wilhelmi. 2011. “Differential Adaptive Capacity to Extreme Heat: A Phoenix, Arizona, Case Study.” Weather, Climate, and Society 3(4):269–280. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-11-00010.1. Heath, G. 2022. “Lessons from LA100.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions | Pathways to an Equitable and Just Transition Workshop. July 26. https://www.nation- alacademies.org/event/07-26-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states-technology-policy-and- societal-dimensions-pathways-to-an-equitable-and-just-transition-workshop. Heffron, R.J., and D. McCauley. 2017. “The Concept of Energy Justice Across the Disciplines.” Energy Policy 105:658–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.018. Henry, M.S., M.D. Bazilian, and C. Markuson. 2020. “Just Transitions: Histories and Futures in a Post-COVID World.” Energy Research and Social Science 68:101668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101668. Hernández, D., and S. Bird. 2010. “Energy Burden and the Need for Integrated Low-Income Housing and Energy Policy.” Poverty and Public Policy 2(4):668–688. https://doi.org/10.2202/1944-2858.1095. Hernández, D., Y. Aratani, and Y. Jiang. 2014. Energy Insecurity Among Families with Children. National Center for Children in Poverty. https://www.nccp.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/text_1086.pdf. Hernández, D., Y. Jiang, D. Carrión, D. Phillips, and Y. Aratani. 2016. “Housing Hardship and Energy Insecurity Among Native-Born and Immigrant Low-Income Families with Children in the United States.” Journal of Children and Poverty 22(2):77–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/10796126.2016.1148672. Hillier, A.E. 2003. “Redlining and the Homeowners’ Loan Corporation.” Journal of Urban History 29(4):394–420. Hoffman, J.S., V. Shandas, and N. Pendleton. 2020. “The Effects of Historical Housing Policies on Resident Exposure to Intra-Urban Heat: A Study of 108 U.S. Urban Areas.” Climate 8(1):12. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli8010012. Hsu, A., G. Sheriff, T. Chakraborty, and D. Manya. 2021. “Disproportionate Exposure to Urban Heat Island Intensity Across Major US Cities.” Nature Communications 12(1):2721. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22799-5. HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development). 2023. “FY 2021 Healthy Homes and Weatherization Co- operation Demonstration.” https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/spm/gmomgmt/grantsinfo/fundingopps/ fy21_hhweatherization. 139 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 139 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S IEA (International Energy Agency). 2023. “Tracking Clean Energy Progress—Topics.” https://www.iea.org/topics/ tracking-clean-energy-progress. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2022. “Summary for Policymakers.” Pp. 3–33 in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Inter- governmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781009157926.001. Irani, D., J. Leh, C. Menking, and N. Shokry. 2021. “Just Transition Study Update.” In The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Re- duction Act: 2030 GGRA Plan. Regional Economic Studies Institute: Townson University. https://mde.maryland.gov/ programs/air/ClimateChange/Documents/2030%20GGRA%20Plan/Just%20Transition%20Study%20Update.pdf. Jackson, K. 1985. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press. Jackson, K.T. 1980. “Federal Subsidy and the Suburban Dream: The First Quarter-Century of Government Intervention in the Housing Market.” Records of the Columbia Historical Society, Washington, DC 50:421–451. Jenkins, K. 2018. “Setting Energy Justice Apart from the Crowd: Lessons from Environmental and Climate Justice.” Energy Research and Social Science 39:117–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.11.015. Jenkins, K., B.K. Sovacool, and D. McCauley. 2018. “Humanizing Sociotechnical Transitions Through Energy Justice: An Ethical Framework for Global Transformative Change.” Energy Policy 117:66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.036. Kaijser, A., and A. Kronsell. 2014. “Climate Change Through the Lens of Intersectionality.” Environmental Politics 23(3):417–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2013.835203. Katznelson, I. 2005. When Affirmative Action Was White: An Untold History of Racial Inequality in Twentieth-Century America. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Konisky, D.M., S. Carley, M. Graff, and T. Memmott. 2022. “The Persistence of Household Energy Insecurity During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Environmental Research Letters 17(10):104017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac90d7. Krieger, N. 2022. “Panel Discussion.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions | Pathways to an Equitable and Just Transition Workshop. July 26. https://www.nation- alacademies.org/event/07-26-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states-technology-policy-and- societal-dimensions-pathways-to-an-equitable-and-just-transition-workshop. Kulcsar, L.J., T. Selfa, and C.M. Bain. 2016. “Privileged Access and Rural Vulnerabilities: Examining Social and Environmental Exploitation in Bioenergy Development in the American Midwest.” Journal of Rural Studies 47:291–299. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.01.008. LA SAFE (Louisiana’s Strategic Adaptations for Future Environments). 2019. “Regional and Parish Adaptation Strategies.” https://lasafe.la.gov. Lerner, S. 2010. Sacrifice Zones: The Front Lines of Toxic Chemical Exposure in the United States. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lewis, J. 2022. “Panel Discussion.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Pol- icy, and Societal Dimensions: Implementing a Just and Equitable Energy Transition—Nonprofit Perspectives. March 29. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/03-29-2022/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states- technology-policy-and-societal-dimensions-just-transition-webinar-series-non-profit-perspectives. Liévanos, R.S. 2018. “Retooling CalEnviroScreen: Cumulative Pollution Burden and Race-Based Environmental Health Vulnerabilities in California.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(4):762. https://doi. org/10.3390/ijerph15040762. Liu, J., L.P. Clark, M.J. Bechle, A. Hajat, S.-Y. Kim, A.L. Robinson, L. Sheppard, A.A. Szpiro, and J.D. Marshall. 2021. “Dispari- ties in Air Pollution Exposure in the United States by Race/Ethnicity and Income, 1990–2010.” Environmental Health Perspectives 129(12):127005. https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/abs/10.1289/EHP8584. Lobao, L., M. Zhou, M. Partridge, and M. Betz. 2016. “Poverty, Place, and Coal Employment Across Appalachia and the United States in a New Economic Era: Poverty, Place, and Coal Employment.” Rural Sociology 81(3):343–386. https:// doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12098. Logan, J., and H. Molotch. 2005. “The City as a Growth Machine: From Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place (1987).” Chapter 11 in The Urban Sociology Reader, J. Lin and C. Mele, eds. London, UK: Routledge. Lucas, K. 2012. “Transport and Social Exclusion: Where Are We Now?” Transport Policy 20:105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tranpol.2012.01.013. 140 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 140 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Lukanov, B.R., and E.M. Krieger. 2019. “Distributed Solar and Environmental Justice: Exploring the Demographic and Socio-Economic Trends of Residential PV Adoption in California.” Energy Policy 134:110935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. enpol.2019.110935. Luskin Center for Innovation (University of California, Los Angeles, Luskin Center for Innovation). 2020. “Transform Fresno: A Baseline and Progress Report on Early Implementation of the Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant.” Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, Luskin Center for Innovation. Luskin Center for Innovation. 2022. “Transform Fresno: 2022 Progress Report on Implementation of the Transformative Cli- mate Communities Program Grant.” Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, Luskin Center for Innovation. Madrid, J. 2017. “People of the Sun: Ensuring Latino Access and Participation in the Solar Energy Revolution.” Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy 29:37–46. Massey, D.S., and N.A. Denton. 1998. American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Memmott, T., S. Carley, M. Graff, and D.M. Konisky. 2021. “Sociodemographic Disparities in Energy Insecurity Among Low-Income Households Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Nature Energy 6(2):186–193. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41560-020-00763-9. Méndez, M. 2020. Climate Change from the Streets: How Conflict and Collaboration Strengthen the Environmental Justice Movement. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Méndez, M., G. Flores-Haro, and L. Zucker. 2020. “The (In)Visible Victims of Disaster: Understanding the Vulner- ability of Undocumented Latino/A and Indigenous Immigrants.” Geoforum 116:50–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. geoforum.2020.07.007. Michney, T.M., and L. Winling. 2020. “New Perspectives on New Deal Housing Policy: Explicating and Mapping HOLC Loans to African Americans.” Journal of Urban History 46(1):150–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096144218819429. Miller, C.A. 2022. “Redesigning Political Economy: The Promise and Peril of a Green New Deal for Energy.” Chapter 13 in The Green New Deal and the Future of Work, C. Calhoun and B.Y. Fong, eds. New York: Columbia University Press. Miller, C.A. 2023. Chapter 12, “The Future of Energy Ownership.” Pp. 107–114 in Energy Democracies for Sustainable Futures, M. Nadesan, M.J. Pasqualetti, and J. Keahey, eds. Elsevier, Inc. Morello-Frosch, R., M. Zuk, M. Jerrett, B. Shamasunder, and A.D. Kyle. 2011. “Understanding the Cumulative Impacts of Inequalities in Environmental Health: Implications for Policy.” Health Affairs 30(5):879–887. https://doi.org/10.1377/ hlthaff.2011.0153. Morrissey, J., E. Schwaller, D. Dickson, and S. Axon. 2020. “Affordability, Security, Sustainability? Grassroots Commu- nity Energy Visions from Liverpool, United Kingdom.” Energy Research and Social Science 70:101698. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101698. Nadesan, M., M.J. Pasqualetti, and J. Keahey, eds. 2023. Energy Democracies for Sustainable Futures. Elsevier, Inc. NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2021. Accelerating Decarbonization of the U.S. Energy System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NASEM. 2022. “Pathways to an Equitable and Just Transition Workshop.” Hosted by Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/01-06-2023/ accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united-states-technology-policy-and-societal-dimensions-transformative- climate-communities-lessons-learned-and-best-practices. NASEM. 2023a. “Panel Discussion.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions: Transformative Climate Communities—Lessons Learned and Best Practices Webinar. January 6. NASEM. 2023b. Pathways to an Equitable and Just Energy Transition: Principles, Best Practices, and Inclusive Stakeholder Engagement: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NASEM. n.d. “Utilizing Advanced Environmental Health and Geospatial Data and Technologies to Inform Commu- nity Investment.” https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/utilizing-advanced-environmental-health-and- geospatial-data-and-technologies-to-inform-community-investment. Accessed March 15, 2023. Natter, A. 2023. “Neighbors Don’t Want to Be ‘Test Dummies’ for Biden’s Carbon Removal Hubs.” Bloomberg News. https:// www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-23/biden-s-co2-capture-hubs-to-fight-climate-change-meet-local- resistance. 141 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 141 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S NETL (National Energy Technology Laboratory). 2023. “Oxy-Combustion.” https://netl.doe.gov/node/7477. OMB (Office of Management and Budget). 2021. Study to Identify Methods to Assess Equity: Report to the President. Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget. Ong, P., A. Cheng, A. Comandon, and S. Gonzalez. 2023. Chapter 6, “South Los Angeles Since the Sixties: Half a Century of Change?” Pp. 111–136 in California Policy Options 2019, D.J.B. Mitchel, ed. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, Luskin School of Public Affairs. Õunmaa, L. 2021. “What Are the Socio-Economic Impacts of An Energy Transition?” UNDP Europe and Central Asia. https:// www.undp.org/eurasia/blog/what-are-socio-economic-impacts-energy-transition. Park, A. 2014. “Equity in Sustainability: An Equity Scan of Local Government Sustainability Programs.” Urban Sustainability Directors Network. https://www.usdn.org/uploads/cms/documents/usdn_equity_scan_sept_2014_final.pdf. P.L. (Public Law) 117-2. 2021. “American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.” https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/ house-bill/1319/text. P.L. 117-169. 2022. “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.” https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text. P.L. 117-58. 2021. “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.” https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684/ text. Pollin, R., and B. Callaci. 2019. “The Economics of Just Transition: A Framework for Supporting Fossil Fuel–Dependent Workers and Communities in the United States.” Labor Studies Journal 44(2):93–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0160449X18787051. Qin, H., P. Romero-Lankao, J. Hardoy, and A. Rosas-Huerta. 2015. “Household Responses to Climate-Related Hazards in Four Latin American Cities: A Conceptual Framework and Exploratory Analysis.” Urban Climate 14:94–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.05.003. Raimi, D., and S. Pesek. 2022. What Is an “Energy Community”? Alternative Approaches for Geographically Targets Energy Policy. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. Reddy, A.K.N. 2000. Chapter 2, “Energy and Social Issues.” Pp. 39–61 in World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability. New York: United Nations Development Programme. Román, E.M. 2017. Race and Upward Mobility: Seeking, Gatekeeping, and Other Class Strategies in Postwar America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Romero-Lankao, P., and E. Nobler. 2021. Energy Justice: Key Concepts and Metrics Relevant to EERE Transportation Projects. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Romero-Lankao, P., and R. Norton. 2018. “Interdependencies and Risk to People and Critical Food, Energy, and Water Systems: 2013 Flood, Boulder, Colorado, USA.” Earth’s Future 6(11):1616–1629. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018ef000984. Romero-Lankao, P., H. Qin, and K. Dickinson. 2012. “Urban Vulnerability to Temperature-Related Hazards: A Meta- Analysis and Meta-Knowledge Approach.” Global Environmental Change 22(3):670–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. gloenvcha.2012.04.002. Romero-Lankao, P., D.M. Gnatz, O. Wilhelmi, and M. Hayden. 2016. “Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice.” Sustainability 8(12):1224. Romero-Lankao, P., A. Wilson, and D. Zimny-Schmitt. 2022. “Inequality and the Future of Electric Mobility in 36 U.S. Cities: An Innovative Methodology and Comparative Assessment.” Energy Research and Social Science 91:102760. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102760. Romitti, Y., I. Wing, K. Spangler, and G. Wellenius. 2022. “Inequality in the Availability of Residential Air Conditioning Across 115 US Metropolitan Areas.” PNAS Nexus 1. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac210. Ross, L., A. Drehobl, and B. Stickles. 2018. The High Cost of Energy in Rural America: Household Energy Burdens and Opportuni- ties for Energy Efficiency. Washington, DC: American Council for and Energy-Efficient Economy. Rothstein, R. 2017. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. New York and London: Liveright Publishing Corporation, W.W. Norton. Sadasivam, N. 2023. “Why the White House’s Environmental Justice Tool Is Still Disappointing Advocates.” Grist. https://grist.org/equity/white-house-environmental-justice-tool-cejst-update-race. Sala, S., A. Vasta, L.A. Mancini, J.L. Dewulf, and E.J. Rosenbaum. 2015. “Social Life Cycle Assessment: State of the Art and Challenges for Supporting Product Policies.” Joint Research Centre, European Commission. EUR 27624. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. JRC99101. 142 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 142 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

Energy Justice and Equity Saunders, I. 2023. “Panel Discussion.” Presented at Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States: Technology, Policy, and Societal Dimensions | Transformative Climate Communities—Lessons Learned and Best Practices. January 6. https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/01-06-2023/accelerating-decarbonization-in-the-united- states-technology-policy-and-societal-dimensions-transformative-climate-communities-lessons-learned-and- best-practices. S.B. (New York State Senate Bill) No. S6599. 2019. New York State Senate. 2019–2020 Legislative Session. https://legislation. nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2019/S6599. Schlosberg, D. 2007. Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Schlosberg, D., and L.B. Collins. 2014. “From Environmental to Climate Justice: Climate Change and the Discourse of Environmental Justice.” WIREs Climate Change 5(3):359–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.275. Segreto, M., L. Principe, A. Desormeaux, M. Torre, L. Tomassetti, P. Tratzi, V. Paolini, and F. Petracchini. 2020. “Trends in Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Across Europe—A Literature Review.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17(24):9161. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17249161. Selfa, T., L. Kulcsar, C. Bain, R. Goe, and G. Middendorf. 2011. “Biofuels Bonanza?: Exploring Community Perceptions of the Promises and Perils of Biofuels Production.” Biomass and Bioenergy 35(4):1379–1389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biombioe.2010.09.008. Sen, A. 2009. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. SGC (California Strategic Growth Council). 2021. Transformative Climate Communities Program: Round 4 DRAFT Program Guidelines—FY 2021–2022. https://sgc.ca.gov/programs/tcc/docs/20211116-TCC_Round_4_Draft_Guidelines.pdf. SGC. 2023. Transformative Climate Communities Program: Round 5 Implementation Guidelines. https://sgc.ca.gov/programs/ tcc/docs/20230308-TCC_R5_Guidelines.pdf. Shindell, D., M. Ru, Y. Zhang, K. Seltzer, G. Faluvegi, L. Nazarenko, G.A. Schmidt, et al. 2021. “Temporal and Spatial Distri- bution of Health, Labor, and Crop Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation in the United States.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118(46):e2104061118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2104061118. Smith, L.A., E.W. Brown, J.T. Cook, L. Rosenfeld, E. Feinberg, E. Goodman, M. Kotelchuck, et al. 2007. Unhealthy Conse- quences: Energy Costs and Child Health, a Child Health Impact Assessment of Energy Costs and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Boston, MA: Children’s Health Watch. Sovacool, B.K., and M.H. Dworkin. 2014. Global Energy Justice: Problems, Principles, and Practices. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107323605. Sovacool, B.K., P. Newell, S. Carley, and J. Fanzo. 2022. “Equity, Technological Innovation and Sustainable Behaviour in a Low-Carbon Future.” Nature Human Behaviour 6(3):326–337. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01257-8. Spurlock, C.A., S. Elmallah, and T.G. Reames. 2022. “Equitable Deep Decarbonization: A Framework to Facilitate Energy Justice-Based Multidisciplinary Modeling.” Energy Research and Social Science 92:102808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. erss.2022.102808. Supreme Court Docket Number 20-1199. 2023. Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1199/274255/20230731100842602_EFiling%2020-1199%20 Rev%20COSTS%20CA1%207.31.pdf. Sze, J., and J.K. London. 2008 “Environmental Justice at the Crossroads.” Sociology Compass 2/4:1331–1354. Tarekegne, B.W., G.R. Pennell, D.C. Preziuso, and R.S. O’Neil. 2021. Review of Energy Equity Metrics. Pacific Northwest Na- tional Laboratory. Taylor, D.E., and M. Blondell. 2023. Examining Disparities in Environmental Grantmaking: Where the Money Goes. New Haven, CT: Yale School of the Environment. Tomer, A., C. George, J.W. Kane, and A. Bourne. 2021. “America Has an Infrastructure Bill. What Happens Next?” https:// www.brookings.edu/articles/america-has-an-infrastructure-bill-what-happens-next. Urban Institute. n.d. Federal Agencies’ Equity Action Plans: Analysis, Summaries, Recommendations. https://www.urban.org/ projects/federal-agencies-equity-action-plans-analysis-summaries-recommendations. Accessed March 15, 2023. UN (United Nations). n.d. The 17 Goals—History. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://sdgs. un.org/goals. Accessed March 15, 2023. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2022. “What Is a Just Transition? And Why Is It Important?” UNDP Climate. https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/what-just-transition-and-why-it-important. 143 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 143 3/30/24 2:14 PM 

A C C E L E R AT I N G D E C A R B O N I Z AT I O N I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S Vogelsong, S. 2022. “Predatory Residential Solar Installers Could Sow Mistrust, Advocates Fear: More Guardrails Sought for Industry.” Virginia Mercury. https://www.virginiamercury.com/2022/05/25/as-residential-solar-grows- more-popular-advocates-worry-about-consumer-protections. Walker, C., L. Shaver, and C. Macomber. 2022. “How Prepared Are US Cities to Implement the Justice40 Initiative?” World Resources Institute Technical Perspective. https://www.wri.org/technical-perspectives/how-prepared-are- us-cities-implement-justice40-initiative. Walker, G. 2009. “Beyond Distribution and Proximity: Exploring the Multiple Spatialities of Environmental Justice.” Antipode 41(4):614–636. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00691.x. Walls, M.A. 2022. “Climate Policy, Environmental Justice, and the Inflation Reduction Act.” Resources. August 9. https://www. resources.org/common-resources/climate-policy-environmental-justice-and-the-inflation-reduction-act. Wang, Y., J.S. Apte, J.D. Hill, C.E. Ivey, R.F. Patterson, A.L. Robinson, C.W. Tessum, and J.D. Marshall. 2022. “Location-Specific Strategies for Eliminating US National Racial-Ethnic PM2.5 Exposure Inequality.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119(44):e2205548119. https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2205548119. WBA (World Benchmarking Alliance). 2021. Just Transition Assessment 2021: Are High-Emitting Companies Putting People at the Heart of Decarbonization? World Benchmarking Alliance. https://assets.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/app/ uploads/2021/11/2021_JustTransitionAssessment.pdf. We Act for Environmental Justice. 2022. “We Act for Environmental Justice Responds to Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.” https://www.weact.org/2022/07/we-act-for-environmental-justice-responds-to-inflation-reduction-act-of-2022. White House. 2021a. “The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Advances Environmental Justice.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/ briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/16/the-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-advances-environmental-justice. White House. 2021b. “Fact Sheet: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ statements-releases/2021/11/06/fact-sheet-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal. White House. 2022a. Advancing Equity Through the American Rescue Plan. Washington, DC. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ wp-content/uploads/2022/05/advancing-equity-through-the-american-rescue-plan.pdf. White House. 2022b. “Biden-Harris Administration Launches Version 1.0 of Climate and Economic Justice Screen- ing Tool, Key Step in Implementing President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/ news-updates/2022/11/22/biden-harris-administration-launches-version-1-0-of-climate-and-economic-justice- screening-tool-key-step-in-implementing-president-bidens-justice40-initiative. White House. 2022c. “Fact Sheet: The Inflation Reduction Act Supports Workers and Families.” https://www.whitehouse. gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/19/fact-sheet-the-inflation-reduction-act-supports-workers-and- families. Wilgosh, B., A.H. Sorman, and I. Barcena. 2022. “When Two Movements Collide: Learning from Labour and Environmental Struggles for Future Just Transitions.” Futures 137:102903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102903. Wüste, A., and P. Schmuck. 2012. “Bioenergy Villages and Regions in Germany: An Interview Study with Initiators of Communal Bioenergy Projects on the Success Factors for Restructuring the Energy Supply of the Community.” Sustainability 4(2):244–256. https://doi.org/10.3390/su4020244. Yoder, K. 2022. “ ‘It Makes Climate Change Real’: How Carbon Emissions Got Rebranded as ‘Pollution.’ ” Grist. https://grist. org/health/how-carbon-emissions-got-rebranded-climate-pollution-ira. Young, S.D., B. Mallory, and G. McCarthy. 2021. “Interim Implementation Guidance for the Justice40 Initiative.” M-21-28 Memorandum for the Heads of Departments and Agencies. Young, S.D., B. Mallory, and A. Zaidi. 2023. “Addendum to the Interim Implementation Guidance for the Justice40 Initia- tive, M-21-28, on Using the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST).” M-23-06. Memorandum for the Heads of Departments and Agencies. Zhao, A., S. Kennedy, K. O’Keefe, M. Borreo, K. Clark-Sutton, R. Cui, C. Dahl, et al. 2022. An “All-In” Pathway to 2030: Beyond 50 Scenario. University of Maryland, Center for Global Sustainability. https://cgs.umd.edu/sites/default/files/2022-11/ CGS_UMD_Beyond50report_Nov2022.pdf. Zhong, R., and N. Popovich. 2022. “How Air Pollution Across America Reflects Racist Policy from the 1930s: A New Study Shows How Redlining, A Depression-Era Housing Policy, Contributed to Inequalities That Persist Decades Later in U.S. Cities.” The New York Times. March 9. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/09/climate/redlining-racism-air- pollution.html. 144 A00026--Accelerating Decarbonization in the United States_CH02.indd 144 3/30/24 2:14 PM