Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Twitter @policyintegrity

In the News

  • Next Year ‘Even Larger’ for Rollbacks — Regs Chief

    September 26, 2018 – E&E News

    In the panel discussion, Richard Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University, slammed its impact on cost-benefit analysis. “[Executive Order] 13771 requires a cap on costs, suggesting the goal of the regulatory system is to minimize overall regulatory costs, not to maximize the net benefits of regulation, which is the hallmark of cost-benefit analysis,” he said.

  • How FERC Can Protect Customers and Respect State Energy Policy Authority in its PJM Capacity Market

    September 26, 2018 – Utility Dive

    State climate policies enhance rather than detract from market efficiency, as explained by scholars at the Institute for Policy Integrity in this capacity markets report.

  • Omitted Health Costs Could Tip Scales on EPA Methane Rollback

    September 17, 2018 – Bloomberg

    Those public health costs “could be the thing that determines whether the rule is actually justified or not,” Avi Zevin, an attorney with the Institute for Policy Integrity, told Bloomberg Environment. “[EPA] should be doing a more complete consideration of what those costs of the foregone health benefits are, what they would mean, and how that factors into their decisionmaking,” Zevin said.

  • Trump’s EPA Chooses Coal Over the American People

    September 13, 2018 – The Hill (Opinion)

    In a recent proposal to replace the Clean Power Plan, the Trump administration made little attempt to sugarcoat the consequences of its decision.

  • Trump Takes Aim at Obama-Era Methane Rules

    September 13, 2018 – Bloomberg (Radio)

    Richard Revesz discusses why the Trump administration is proposing to relax Obama-era rules that were meant to block rogue methane leaks from oil and gas wells.

  • EPA Expands Clean Air Act Loopholes for Coal Plants

    September 5, 2018 – The Hill (Opinion)

    EPA calls its Affordable Clean Energy proposal “a new rule to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” from coal-fired power plants. There are just two problems with that characterization: ACE won’t do much of anything to reduce coal plants’ CO2 emissions, and the rule isn’t really new at all.

  • Stars Aligning for EPA Change in Calculating Air Rules Benefits

    August 31, 2018 – Bloomberg

    Bucking the science on particulate matter’s health impacts could carry a legal risk, Michael Livermore told Bloomberg Environment. “Courts like deferring to agencies, but if they think the agency is untrustworthy on fundamental science, that is a huge problem for the agency,” he said. The EPA might have some discretion to adjust its co-benefit treatment, “but they might also threaten their ability to get deference in general by risking their scientific credibility.”

  • Tainted Review

    August 29, 2018 – The Regulatory Review (Opinion)

    Environmentalists should question any move by this Administration’s EPA to reform its cost-benefit analysis.

  • Why Bailouts Won’t Make the Electric Grid More Resilient

    August 27, 2018 – The Hill (Opinion)

    The Trump administration’s coal and nuclear bailout proposals wouldn’t truly protect customers from damaging electricity outages. Policymakers interested in serious, evidence-based resilience improvements already have the tools they need to act—including metrics for measuring resilience, a framework for evaluating improvements, and legal authorities to implement changes.

  • The 6 Things You Most Need to Know About Trump’s New Climate Plan

    August 24, 2018 – Vox

    “When an agency wants to do something that’s harmful to the American people, it typically tries to hide it,” Richard Revesz of the Institute for Policy Integrity told Johnson. “What’s unusual here is that the EPA just comes out and says it.”