The full workbook behind our "Net Zero in Law" Tech Note - inventory data, sub-sector breakdowns, regulatory citations, and methodology notes for 15 jurisdictions covering ~84% of global emissions.

For each jurisdiction, the workbook documents inventory vintage, sub-sector emissions in MtCO₂e, bucket classification (A, B, or C) with rationale, and the specific regulations cited in support. The methodology is federal-only, territorial, and LULUCF-excluded, applied consistently across all 15 jurisdictions.

This is a public-interest analytical tool, not a static publication. It will be updated as new national inventories are submitted and as new regulation enters force. Corrections, additions, and extensions to additional jurisdictions are welcomed.

Free to download and reuse under CC BY 4.0. Cite as: Guetre, L. (2026). Regulate All Emissions: Jurisdiction Analysis. Possible by Design. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21117751

Most people assume climate action will be expensive or disruptive. The carbon math shows the opposite. For the vast majority of everyday products, cleaning up the remaining emissions adds only about 2% to the price - a pattern first highlighted by Jens Burchardt at Boston Consulting Group in 2021 and confirmed again in updated lifecycle data today.

This brief explains why that small cost matters, how it fits into the broader climate system, and why permanent carbon removal is the backstop, not the alternative. We still reduce emissions wherever possible - because reductions are usually cheaper and faster - and use permanent removal only for the residual emissions we can’t eliminate.

You’ll find a clear explanation of the “atmospheric bathtub,” examples of past environmental upgrades that followed the same small‑cost/large‑benefit pattern, and transparent carbon math for dozens of everyday products.

When people understand the true cost of climate action, support rises. This report makes that understanding intuitive, evidence‑based, and accessible.

Most countries have only half the toolkit.  This report shows what the other half is worth.

Opening all climate-aligned pathways - efficiency, electrification, fuel switching, carbon capture, and permanent carbon dioxide removal - dramatically lowers the cost of reaching net zero. Today, most governments have activated only part of the available toolkit. Permanent CDR pathways are allowed in principle but unavailable in practice in most jurisdictions, because recognized standards do not yet exist. Without those standards, governments cannot procure permanent removals, innovators cannot access stable demand, and taxpayers end up paying more for a restricted set of options. In many jurisdictions, that premium is two to three times the cost of the lowest available alternative.

This report shows how recognizing all science-aligned pathways could save governments billions annually in procurement costs, unlock trillions in avoided costs across hard-to-abate sectors globally, and accelerate net zero progress - all without additional government spending. It is a standards decision, not a spending decision.

This is part of our series on practical, evidence-based climate solutions that deliver impact without added cost.

Seven major economies have legislated net zero. The regulations that would actually deliver it are missing in every one. This analysis takes stock of where every jurisdiction stands.

Across 15 jurisdictions representing roughly 84% of global emissions, we classified every emissions source into one of three buckets: A (unregulated), B (regulated, but no binding path to zero), or C (a binding regulation requiring fossil emissions to be reduced as far as possible, with any residuals matched 1:1 with permanent geological storage on a defined timeline).

Bucket C is empty. Almost. One regulation - Canada's coal-fired electricity standard, covering 0.44% of Canadian emissions - is the only existing example anywhere in the world. Seven of the 15 have legislated net zero into primary law - and not one has translated that pledge into the regulation that would deliver it.

The path forward is well understood: codify the geological net zero standard in statute, build abatement pathway standards underneath it, set predictable pre-announced ramps, and use climate footprint labels and border adjustments to close the loop. Most products would cost roughly 2% more under this regime. The technology and economics are in hand. What remains is codification. This analysis is the empirical foundation for Regulate All Emissions, the fourth of Possible by Design's four advocacy ideas.

Understanding global emissions can feel abstract.  We hear about sectors, industries, and national inventories, but we experience emissions through the food we eat, the homes we live in, the things we buy, and the ways we move through the world. This report reframes global greenhouse gas emissions through a consumption‑side lens, helping us see where emissions actually show up in daily life and where our choices and signals can have the greatest impact.

Using the latest global data, we map emissions from their production‑side sources (like energy, industry, and agriculture) to the consumption‑side categories where they appear in our lives. This approach reveals powerful insights, including why food is one of the largest drivers of global emissions, why passenger travel dominates the transport footprint, and how more than 40 billion tonnes of emissions flow through the goods, services, and systems we rely on every day.

This framework is foundational to our work at Possible by Design. It maps where shared systems shape our choices, highlights high-impact actions across both producer and consumer surfaces, and guides the development of upcoming Research & Insights deep dives, and Advocacy pathways.

Requiring climate‑footprint labels on products could drive significant global emissions reductions. This analysis outlines the mechanism, the evidence, and the potential impact.

Climate‑footprint labels make the climate impact of everyday products visible at the point of choice - and that simple shift unlocks one of the largest, lowest‑cost emissions reductions available today. Four consumption categories shaped directly by product‑level transparency account for 61% of global emissions, and these are precisely the sectors where labeling reliably drives producer reformulation, supply‑chain cleanup, and meaningful consumer shifts.

Using conservative, sector‑specific assumptions grounded in decades of evidence from nutrition labels, EU energy labels, and fuel‑economy standards, our analysis finds that mandatory climate‑footprint labels could reduce global emissions by 1–5 gigatonnes of CO₂e per year, with a central estimate of ~3 Gt - roughly equivalent to the annual emissions of the European Union.

The mechanism is straightforward:

• Producers clean up supply chains, delivering over 1 Gt/year

• Small shifts in food choices add 0.6–1.2 Gt/year

• Freight, packaging, and materials optimization adds ~0.9 Gt/year

• Waste and leakage reductions add ~0.2 Gt/year

Climate‑footprint labels are not a new idea - they are the next step in a global transparency tradition that has already transformed markets for nutrition, energy use, and vehicle efficiency. As major economies move toward carbon‑transparent supply chains, climate‑footprint labels offer a practical, scalable, and low‑cost tool for accelerating decarbonization worldwide.

 

This is part of our series on practical, evidence-based climate solutions that deliver impact without added cost.