Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Twitter @policyintegrity

Publications

Viewing all publications in Climate Change and Energy Policy
  • Setting the Record Straight on the Clean Power Plan
    Policy Brief

    Setting the Record Straight on the Clean Power Plan

    What the Challengers Got Wrong at the D.C. Circuit Oral Argument

    By Richard L. Revesz, Denise A. Grab, and Jack Lienke
    October 27, 2016

    On September 27, opponents of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan presented their case against the rule in a hearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The Clean Power Plan aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s existing power plants. A coalition of states, utilities, coal companies, and other industry groups have sought to block the rule since it was first proposed in June 2014, while a competing group of states, municipalities, power companies, environmental and public health organizations, and clean energy producers have intervened to support the EPA. Over the course of the seven-hour hearing, the petitioners challenging the Clean Power Plan asserted and implied a number of things that don’t stand up to scrutiny. This report sets the record straight on some of their more notable misstatements.

  • Bounded Regulation
    Policy Brief

    Bounded Regulation

    How the Clean Power Plan Conforms to Statutory Limits on EPA’s Authority

    By Richard L. Revesz, Denise A. Grab, and Jack Lienke
    September 12, 2016

    This policy brief analyzes the limits of the EPA’s Section 111 regulatory authority and determines that the CPP explicitly acknowledges and respects each of the EPA’s statutory constraints. The brief discusses the eight major constraints for emissions guidelines under Clean Air Act Section 111, and examines how the CPP handles each one. The analysis finds no evidence to support petitioners’ accusations that the the EPA exceeded its regulatory authority.

  • Think Global
    Academic Article/Working Paper

    Think Global

    International Reciprocity as Justification for a Global Social Cost of Carbon

    By Peter H. Howard and Jason A. Schwartz
    August 16, 2016

    U.S. climate regulations present a special case of federal agencies applying a global, rather than exclusively domestic, perspective to the costs and benefits in their regulatory impact analyses. Since 2010, federal agencies have emphasized global valuations of climate damages for policies that affect carbon dioxide emissions, using a metric called the “Social Cost of Carbon.” More recently, agencies have also begun to use a global valuation of the “Social Cost of Methane,” for methane emissions. Yet lately, these global metrics have come under attack in courtrooms and academic journals, where opponents have challenged the statutory authority and economic justification for global values. This paper defends a continued focus on the global effects of U.S. climate policy, drawing on legal, strategic, and economic arguments.

  • Next Steps to Reform the Regulations Governing Offshore Oil and Gas Planning and Leasing
    Academic Article/Working Paper

    Next Steps to Reform the Regulations Governing Offshore Oil and Gas Planning and Leasing

    By Andrew Hartsig, Michael Levine, Jayni Foley Hein, and Jason Schwartz,
    June 22, 2016

    In this Article, we argue that fundamental reform is necessary and highlight a series of key themes and topics that must be addressed to improve the regulatory process and promote better, more consistent management outcomes. While the Article draws on examples from frontier areas-in particular the U.S. Arctic Ocean-the recommended changes would apply to and benefit all areas of the OCS.

  • Priorities for Federal Coal Reform
    Report

    Priorities for Federal Coal Reform

    Twelve Policy and Procedural Goals for the Programmatic Review

    By Jayni Foley Hein
    June 21, 2016

    This report highlights twelve policy and procedural recommendations for the review of the federal coal program. These reforms are intended to help modernize program and so that it can provide maximum net benefits to American taxpayers. The programmatic review should identify opportunities to increase revenue, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and align federal land management with U.S. climate change goals, paying enormous dividends to the public.