I was only six months out of college when I ruined my own life.
I was camping at Enchanted Rock, Texas, and decided to explore the rock at night. Distracted for just five seconds, I walked off the edge of a 45-foot cliff into a crack in the Earth. As darkness swallowed me, I had time to think. I figured out pretty fast that I probably wasn’t going to make it out of there. I supposed that if you have time to think at all, it’s probably a long way down.
I haven’t had a pain-free day since.
One of my injuries consisted of shattering my left ankle into a fine powder. The ankle is the fulcrum on which the entire body pivots. Most people use their ankles a lot. I was young, and I had actually planned a long life where I used mine a lot, too. I was an athlete. I was a fashionista. I broke my own heart when I walked the edge of that cliff. I stole my own future right out from under me. I didn’t make all the right decisions in a course where many were needed, and I ended up in the bad version of my timeline. As most young people do, I had planned for my alter-ego chronic pain twin to be in some other universe, not mine.
It’s been almost eighteen years since I fell off that cliff. My ankle still hurts every day, and I don’t walk very much, or very far, or very well. I’ve had four ankle surgeries, each with its own uniquely painful recovery. All this time, I’ve kept hoping technology would improve and there would be some relief for me while I still crave adventure and movement. It looks like I waited long enough.
Technology did improve, and I am getting an exoskeleton.
I am elated. Unfortunately, it’s not a good time for elation. I work on climate change. Everyone in my whole industry, the climate industry, is suffering. These aren’t just people I work with—they are my colleagues, my friends, my peers, most of my community. They are so worried about what is going to happen next. It makes sense that they don’t know. The United States, as the world’s lone superpower, has stepped back into a role of stated climate denial, abandoning international climate commitments while other nations continue their efforts. But there is actually hope. We’re not going to get some kind of awesome climate exoskeleton (like the solar umbrella), but we are still here working on climate change.
I’ve spent eighteen years learning to adapt to life with chronic pain, and I’ve spent my career watching the climate movement adapt to repeated federal policy failures. And you know what? The US has walked this climate policy road before, too. Remember Obama’s Clean Power Plan? Remember the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement? Climate workers really wanted those to be successful; we were banking on it. And what did we do when each and every federal climate policy failed? We figured it out. We started again from base principles, and we started again. That’s what we do here. It’s in the job description.
We often forget what we did to continue to make progress on climate change after those climate disappointments. Furthermore, there’s widespread doubt that the work being done on climate makes a difference without federal support. But some people, like me, know the secret. Maybe you know it too and just want the reminder to give you a moment’s peace or inspiration. Whatever your situation, feel free to read ahead, and get the reminder that climate advocates’ greatest skill is the ability to adapt, to innovate, and to inspire hope in each other.
–Anna Kelly
Federal Climate Policy is Always Chaos (1990-2025)
The past 35 years of climate policy reveal a stark contrast between chaotic federal leadership and steady progress at state and international levels. Here’s the story.
Federal climate policy since 1990 has been characterized by extreme volatility, with each presidential administration either advancing or dismantling the work of its predecessor. This chaotic pattern has created a policy environment that alternates between progress and regression on roughly four-year cycles.
The story began with when George H.W. Bush administration’s signed the UNFCCC in 1992, establishing initial U.S. commitment to international climate action. However, this early progress was quickly undermined by Senate opposition in 1997 and the subsequent withdrawal from Kyoto Protocol negotiations in 2001 under George W. Bush.
The Obama era brought a new era of hope that the federal government would take climate change seriously. The administration was poised to usher in a period of significant federal climate investment, including $90 billion in renewable energy stimulus funding and the Clean Power Plan, which the administration finalized in August 2015. These advances were systematically dismantled during the 1st Trump administration.
The Biden administration briefly restored climate leadership with rejoining the Paris Agreement and passing the Inflation Reduction Act in 2021, which was supposed to be the largest climate investment in U.S. history. Trump’s return to office in January 2025 has again triggered the end of the IRA and another withdrawal from the Paris agreement.
This federal volatility demonstrates a policy environment with dramatic swings in direction and magnitude, creating uncertainty that has hindered long-term planning and investment certainty across multiple sectors.
Regional Initiatives
In stark contrast to federal volatility, state-level climate policies have demonstrated remarkable consistency and steady progress over the past two decades. State initiatives have not only maintained momentum during federal policy reversals but have actually accelerated their efforts.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), launched in 2005, exemplifies state-level consistency in climate action. The core RGGI states, which include Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont have achieved steady emissions reductions of 50% since 2005, when the program was established. The ten fully participating RGGI states have reduced annual power sector emissions by 50% compared to the 2006-2008 baseline, which is almost 50% faster than the nation as a whole.
As of 2022, RGGI investments had directly benefited over 8 million households and 400,000 businesses in the region, with projected savings of over $20 billion on energy bills.
Building Performance Standards are another state and local policy leading the transition to a clean grid, clean buildings, and improved climate outcome. Increasingly being passed for energy and greenhouse gasses, we should see massive improvements in jurisdictions with BPS by mid-century. I’m keeping a close eye on those policies.
Renewable Energy
State renewable portfolio standards (RPS) have shown similarly consistent progress. Twenty-nine states plus DC have adopted RPS policies, with 16 states setting targets of at least 50% renewable electricity. These standards have driven roughly half of all U.S. renewable energy growth since 2000, representing steady, linear expansion of clean energy deployment.
The cumulative impact of state RPS policies has been substantial. Almost half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity generation and capacity since 2000 is nominally associated with state RPS requirements. While this percentage has declined over time to 35% of all U.S. renewable capacity additions in 2023, in certain regions like the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, RPS policies continue to play a dominant role in driving renewable energy growth.
International Climate Policy
International climate policy has followed a more methodical and consistent path than federal U.S. policy, building incrementally on previous agreements and frameworks over three decades.
The international climate policy timeline reveals a steady progression of institution-building and framework development. Beginning with the UNFCCC in 1992, the international community has systematically expanded the scope and ambition of climate agreements.
While in 2019 climate analysts estimated that EU policies would reduce emissions by 33% from 1990 levels, current estimates project emissions reduction of around 51%, placing EU emissions on a path consistent with limiting warming to just above 2°C. This represents more than a 1°C improvement in projected warming since the Green Deal’s implementation.
Renewables
Global renewable energy deployment has shown remarkable consistency and acceleration, regardless of policy volatility in individual countries. Global renewable capacity has grown from approximately 468 GW in 1990 to 4,448 GW by 2024.
In 2024 alone, new global renewable capacity additions reached 585 GW, representing 15.1% annual growth. This represents the largest annual increase in renewable capacity on record, demonstrating technology-driven momentum that operates independently of any single country’s policy choices.
Even during periods of U.S. federal policy reversal, global renewable capacity has continued its upward trajectory, driven by technological cost reductions, international policy frameworks, and state-level initiatives that maintain demand for clean energy technologies.
Things are Getting Better
One of the most significant developments over the past 35 years has been the evolution of global emissions trajectories away from the worst-case scenarios originally projected by the IPCC. This improvement illustrates how state and international policy consistency has begun to bend the global emissions curve.
The 1990 IPCC First Assessment Report projected that under a business-as-usual scenario, global emissions would lead to approximately 3°C of warming by the end of the century.
However, the critical insight is that actual global emissions are no longer following the worst-case scenarios. Current policy trajectories suggest global warming of approximately 2.4-2.7°C under existing policies and pledges. Hard to argue that isn’t a substantial improvement from the original 3°C+ projections of the 1990s. This improvement has occurred despite federal policy chaos in the United States, suggesting that state, local, and international action has been sufficient to drive meaningful change.
Stay the Course
All this to say, federal climate policy has consistently been characterized by dramatic reversals and uncertainty, while state initiatives and international frameworks have provided the steady, consistent foundation necessary for long-term progress toward climate goals.
The foundation for climate progress lies in consistent, sustained action at state and international levels. Consistent policies, combined with technology-driven cost reductions, will be proven sufficient to drive meaningful progress even in the face of federal policy chaos. The challenge moving forward is to build on this foundation of consistency and create even more robust systems. We never know what is just around the corner.