Price responsiveness informs utility forecasts of load growth and peak demand, regulatory evaluations of investments and rate structures and government analyses of energy policies and their impacts. A new report from Duke University experts presents updated estimates of one measure of price responsiveness in the U.S. residential electricity market—the price elasticity of demand for electricity—and explores how it varies across all 50 states.

Explore the wide-ranging landscape of power sector competitiveness across the Southeast United States with the Southeast Power Sector Competitiveness Dashboard. During this webinar on Dec. 11, the Nicholas Institute experts who developed the dashboard discussed its purpose, compared regional competitiveness metrics across states in the region, introduced the resource’s interactive features and information through a live demonstration, and answered audience questions.

Virginia ranks first, and Alabama last, in a Southeast power sector “competitiveness” dashboard launched this week by Duke University researchers, reports Utility Dive. Twelve states were scored according to indicators such as participation in wholesale power markets, net metering policies, presence of a consumer advocate, interconnection standards, procurement requirements and third-party power purchase agreements.

Developed by Nicholas Institute experts, the Southeast Power Sector Competitiveness Dashboard assembles key metrics on an array of policies and market characteristics that influence how utilities, regulators, producers and consumers interact. The dashboard covers 12 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.

Jackson Ewing, Nicholas Institute director of energy and climate policy, recently led the 2025 practicum course focused around the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the primary U.N. body for climate diplomacy around the world. Part of a Duke Climate Commitment series of climate research profiles.

In mid-November, more than a dozen Duke students traveled to Belém, Brazil, to attend the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) as part of a unique Duke practicum course. Nicholas Institute expert Jackson Ewing, who leads the practicum course, and some of the students talked with The Chronicle about the experience of observing international negotiations and participating in panels on topics related to climate diplomacy.

How can new data centers for artificial intelligence be sustainably and responsibly powered on the current U.S. electrical grid? A Duke University panel discussion, held at The Nest Main Stage during Climate Week NYC 2025, delivered insights into how to manage electrical loads flexibly and power the AI future sustainably.

At Climate Week New York City 2025, two themes resonated throughout Duke University’s presence: innovation and connections. Duke Today recapped some of the nearly dozen events across the week that Duke experts—including several from the Nicholas Institute—participated in. The events connected climate to finance, health, oceans, technology and more.

A new report by Duke University researchers surveys the sustainability challenges that hyperscale data centers present, examines potential solutions and outlines pragmatic recommendations for companies, utilities, regulators and policymakers. The report is a collaboration of the Deep Tech Initiative at Duke, the Nicholas Institute and Duke Initiative for Science & Society.

Decarbonizing the global economy will require trillions of dollars, largely from private sector investors. What could help accelerate the mobilization of private capital to advance climate solutions? Leaders from finance, government, industry, and academia exchanged ideas about this at the second annual “From Billions to Trillions” summit at Duke University on April 9, 2025. 

During the launch of The Duke Campaign, a session featuring Nicholas Institute experts Brian Murray and Jackson Ewing and Duke students highlighted how the university and stakeholders are collaborating on climate finance and policy to achieve global energy goals and create a more equitable and sustainable world. “This is an interdisciplinary set of challenges, and we attempt to match them to Duke’s interdisciplinary resources,” Ewing said.

While it remains to be seen how much federal clean energy and climate funding the Trump administration can roll back, the effort is already having market effects, Nicholas Institute expert Jackson Ewing told Time. “There's going to be more reticence to invest in some of these energy transition and climate focused sectors, because the political environment is clearly less appealing for those investments now compared to what it was a year ago or six months ago during the Biden administration,” Ewing said.

U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement will not only reduce its influence in international climate negotiations, but will also “trickle down” closer to home, Nicholas Institute expert Jackson Ewing told the Winston-Salem Journal. If the Trump administration begins deprioritizing renewable energy and different investments designed to address climate change, it "could undermine some of the investments that have been made in North Carolina under the previous administration through the Inflation Reduction Act,” he said. 

“I don't think that there is anything in these executive orders or anything in the realm of plausible action that the federal government could take that could prevent Duke from reaching its Climate Commitment and its decarbonization targets," Jackson Ewing, director of energy and climate policy at the Nicholas Institute, told The Chronicle. "Duke has the autonomy [and] the mandate to ensure that those targets are met."

President Trump wants to redirect the federal government away from former President Joe Biden's climate agenda and toward an even deeper embrace of fossil fuels. Jackson Ewing, director of energy and climate policy at the Nicholas Institute, told NPR's All Things Considered that there are limits on the federal government that could hinder Trump, including state, local, and private sector climate action and legal challenges to his executive orders.