McKinsey & Company released a report in November called “Reducing Greenhouse Gases: How Much at What Cost?“

From the executive summary, available here:

• Almost 40 percent of abatement could be achieved at “negative” marginal costs, meaning that investing in these options would generate positive economic returns over their lifecycle. The cumulative savings created by these negative-cost options could substantially offset (on a societal basis) the additional spending required for the options with positive marginal costs.

McKinsey is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a bunch of sandal-wearing, left-wing treehuggers. In fact, this particular study was funded by a number of energy companies. Nonetheless, they’ve come to these conclusions, and a quick look at their prominently website features progressive energy policy. For example, “The Case For Investing in Energy Productivity.”

Perhaps this represents a shift of the political center of gravity among American corporations. If so, a welcome change.

Thanks to David Roberts of Grist.org; see his piece “It Can Be Done” for more details, as well as Mathew Wald’s “Study Details How U.S. Could Cut 28% of Greenhouse Gases.“