Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Twitter @policyintegrity

In the News

Viewing all news in Climate Change and Energy Policy
  • Capturing the massive social benefits of fuel efficiency requires regulation

    November 23, 2009 – Grist

    This Friday is the deadline for public comments on the stricter vehicle efficiency standards from EPA and the Department of Transportation. The docket is likely to be overrun with statements for and against the regulation that would make cars and light trucks 30 percent more efficient in 5 years.

    From an economic perspective, the social benefits of the rule outweigh the costs. The environmental, health, and energy security benefits—most especially from reducing the tailpipe emission of greenhouse gases—could more than double the estimated costs to manufacturers of installing more fuel efficiency technologies: social benefits could total over $800 billion, compared to around $400 billion in compliance costs.

  • America won’t go to Copenhagen empty handed

    November 18, 2009 – Washington Post’s Planet Panel Blog

    Obama Administration regulators have moved forward with a climate agenda at a good clip—taking the issue from zero to sixty to make up for the lost time of the past eight years of stalling. So while the cap-and-trade bill that passed in the House of Representatives is currently stalled in the Senate, it is not true that American negotiators are going to Copenhagen empty handed.

  • Coral Reefs Could be Moneymakers … If They Weren’t Dying

    November 16, 2009 – Environmental Protection’s Planetshed Blog

    Experts at a recent DIVERSITAS biodiversity conference in Cape Town showcased research suggesting that a single acre of coral reef yields an average of $53,000 in annual economic benefits, concluding that worldwide reefs are worth about $172 billion annually. This eye-popping value certainly seems like it would warrant coral reef protection, particularly given the positive rate of return for investing in restoration and conservation projects.

  • NYU Law’s Livermore discusses consensus among experts on economic impacts

    November 11, 2009 – E&E TV

    A recent Institute for Policy Integrity study found most expert economists agree that reducing greenhouse gas emissions can help avoid a major economic malfunction. Which policy options will produce the best results? How will an international agreement affect the economy? During today’s OnPoint, Michael Livermore, executive director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law, discusses the study and explains how its findings can be applied to the congressional climate debate.

  • American economists recognise the climate change threat

    November 6, 2009 – Telegraph

    Last week Americans for Prosperity – the group behind the campaign against the health bill this summer – launched a hot air balloon to “expose the ballooning costs of global warming hysteria”. But a survey by New York University of 289 economists who had published studies related to climate in the 25 top academic journals over the last 15 years threatens to prick it.

  • Obama Admin Weighs Costs of Doing Nothing on Climate

    November 4, 2009 –

    Economists have sparred for years over what price tag to put on the societal danger of carbon dioxide emissions. Now the Obama administration is quietly struggling to reach its own conclusion.

    The answer promises to weigh heavily on a slew of future regulations that directly and indirectly combat climate change.

    “This has huge potential. So many decisions the government makes have an influence on greenhouse gas emissions,” said Michael Livermore, executive director of the Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI) at the New York University School of Law.

  • Most economists give ‘clear endorsement’ for U.S. emission curbs—survey

    November 4, 2009 – Greenwire

    Most economists say the United States should commit to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions regardless of other countries’ actions, according to a survey released today. New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity queried nearly 300 economists who have published articles on climate change and got responses from 144 of them.

    “We can now say that economists agree about the severe effects of climate change on our economy, just as scientists agree about the severe effects of climate change on our planet,” said Richard Revesz, dean of NYU’s law school. “There is a clear endorsement for action among the economists who study this issue.”

  • Economists Concur on Threat of Warming

    November 4, 2009 – The New York Times’s Green Inc. Blog

    A New York University School of Law survey found near unanimity among 144 top economists that global warming threatens the United States economy and that a cap-and-trade system of carbon regulation will spur energy efficiency and innovation.

    “Outside academia the level of consensus among economists is unfortunately not common knowledge,” Richard Revesz, dean of the law school, said during a press conference Wednesday. “The results are conclusive – there is broad agreement that reducing emissions is likely to have significant economic benefits.”

  • Survey: Economists see threat in climate change

    November 3, 2009 – USA Today

    “An economist tree hugger is an imaginary creature,” says Michael Livermore of New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity, which conducted the survey. “But we found that economists really see climate change poses a lot of risk to the economy.”

    The survey approached the 289 economists who had published climate-related studies in the top 25 economics journals in the past 15 years. About half, 144, responded, and 75% agreed or strongly agreed on the “value” of greenhouse-gas controls

  • Five Ways to Fix Urban Transportation

    October 30, 2009 – Americas Quarterly

    Cities need good public transportation systems to prosper and grow. But in today’s world such systems must also be environmentally sustainable. That is especially true in developing countries, where rapid urbanization is creating huge pressure on aging infrastructures. By adopting smart policies that incorporate environmental needs, a city can improve the quality of life for residents while ensuring that its growth does not overtax its resources.