« Back to Results

Costs of Climate Finance

Paper Session

Sunday, Jan. 3, 2027 2:30 PM - 4:30 PM (EST)

Westin DC Downtown
Hosted By: American Finance Association
  • Chair: Kelly Shue, Yale University

It’s Not Easy Being Green

Jonathan Brogaard
,
University of Utah
Nataliya Gerasimova
,
BI Norwegian Business School
Daniel Kim
,
University of Waterloo
Maximilian Rohrer
,
Norwegian School of Economics

Abstract

This paper measures the cost of greening the economy from the customer’s perspective using nearly six million US federal procurement contracts from 2007 to 2024. Green contracts are on average 18 to 43 percent more expensive than comparable non-green contracts. Accounting for endogeneity with a Bartik instrument yields an even higher cost premium. The premium increases with public concern about climate change, declines with experience, and rises with regulatory complexity. Green contracts also involve greater administrative effort, including more modifications and delays. Overall, the green transition imposes substantial but partly transitory costs shaped by public sentiment, learning, and regulation.

Climate Policy Abroad, Emissions at Home: Pollution Reshoring by U.S. Multinationals

Jing He
,
Renmin University of China
Vojislav Maksimovic
,
University of Maryland
Daxuan Zhao
,
Renmin University of China

Abstract

We document a reverse pollution-haven pattern: as global climate policy becomes increasingly uneven and many host countries of U.S. multinationals adopt stricter climate laws than the United States, greater foreign regulatory exposure leads firms to re-shore pollution-intensive activity. A one–standard-deviation increase in foreign exposure raises domestic greenhouse-gas emissions by 0.8% and toxic releases by 7%. Firms headquartered in Democratic-leaning states further redirect this activity to plants in Republican-leaning states, where regulatory pressure is weaker. Managers simultaneously greenwash by downplaying overseas climate risks in earnings calls, and sustainable lenders and financial analysts inadvertently amplify both reshoring and opacity. The resulting domestic pollution worsens air quality and elevates respiratory disease rates, underscoring the substantial public-health costs created by fragmented global climate policy.

Biodiversity Impacts of Renewable Energy

Haozhou Gong
,
University of Hong Kong
Chen Lin
,
University of Hong Kong
Zacharias Sautner
,
University of Zurich
Thomas Schmid
,
University of Hong Kong

Abstract

Renewable energy (RE) is vital for addressing climate change, but the land use of hydro, solar, and wind plants can negatively affect biodiversity through habitat destruction. By combining spatial biodiversity data, satellite imagery, and asset-level information on 40,911 RE plants, we develop a novel measure of RE’s biodiversity impact around the world. We find that solar plants cause the greatest negative impact overall, while hydro plants are located in the most biodiversity-sensitive areas. The biodiversity impact of RE has grown substantially over time, driven by increased land use and siting in more biodiversity-sensitive locations. The top 1% of plants and owners are responsible for the majority of the impact. We use our measure in three corporate finance applications. Publicly-listed and non-financial ownership, as well as balance-sheet financing, are each associated with siting RE projects in higher-impact locations, while private and financial ownership, as well as project finance, align with lower-impact siting choices. These results suggest that ownership structure and financing design translate into systematically different environmental footprints in project siting.

Capital Allocation, Operational Efficiency, and Emissions: The Real Effects of ESG Divestm

Johannes Klausmann
,
University of Houston
Marco Ceccarelli
,
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Christoph Herpfer
,
University of Virginia

Abstract

We study the effect of ESG-induced divestment on access to financing, operating efficiency, and CO2 emissions for long-lived, capital intensive assets: U.S. power plants. Using a shift-share measure of firms' exposure to banks' coal divestment policies, we find that divestment leads to a reduction in debt supply and subsequently lower capital expenditure. We then trace out the full chain of real consequences of this financial shock. Using hourly operating data for all major U.S. power plants, we show that capital rationing causes operational inefficiencies in generator utilization, resulting in inefficiently high CO2 emissions. We show that policy choices play a major role in these unintended consequences. Exploiting the staggered introduction of emissions trading schemes, we show that, unlike ESG divestment, carbon pricing does not lead to inefficient asset utilization and excess CO2 emissions.

Discussant(s)
Julian Koelbel
,
University of St. Gallen
Ian Appel
,
University of Virginia
Andrew Karolyi
,
Cornell University
Sophie Shive
,
University of Notre Dame
JEL Classifications
  • G3 - Corporate Finance and Governance