-
Comments to Maryland PSC on Energy Storage Report
The Maryland Public Service Commission requested input on its working group's energy storage report. We submitted comments in support of several of the working group's recommendations. We also encourage the Commission to apply the same principles that inform the report to assess the net emissions impacts of energy storage installations.
-
Strategic Policymaking for Implementing Renewable Portfolio Standards: A Tri-level Optimization Approach
Forthcoming
Appropriately designed renewable support policies can play a leading role in promoting renewable expansions and contribute to low emission goals. Meanwhile, ill-designed policies may distort electricity markets, put power utilities and generation companies on an unlevel playing field and, in turn, cause inefficiencies. This paper, forthcoming in IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, proposes a framework to optimize policymaking for renewable energy sources, while incorporating conflicting interests and objectives of different stakeholders.
-
Comments to New York PSC on Gas Planning Procedures
The New York Public Service Commission requested input on its Staff Gas System Planning Process Proposal. We submitted comments encouraging the Commission to add several minor requirements and directly address the legal tensions and ambigious policies that make planning decisions more challenging.
-
Comments on FERC’s Office of Public Participation
The Federal Regulatory Energy Commission (FERC) solicited comment from interested parties on how the Commission should structure their Office of Public Participation to facilitate public engagement. We submitted comments highlighting the potential benefits of public participation by environmental justice communities and identifying best practices that FERC’s Office of Public Participation (OPP) should adopt.
-
Tune Up
Fixing Market Failures to Cut Fuel Costs and Pollution from Cars and Trucks
This report analyzes a key issue in U.S. transportation policy: the energy efficiency gap. We discuss the market failures that cause it, and recommend that the Biden administration continue the longstanding practice of incorporating private fuel savings in any evaluation of the costs and benefits of stronger standards for cars and trucks.
-
Department of Interior Delays, Reassesses Trump-Era Rule on Fossil Fuel Royalty Rates
The Department of Interior delayed the effective date of a Trump-era rule that lowers the royalty burden on corporations extracting fossil fuels on public lands. We provided significant input on the review of the rule, helping guide ONRR’s decision to delay the rule and further examine its legality and impact.
-
Comments to Federal Finance Housing Agency on Climate Risk Disclosure
The Federal Housing Finance Agency requested information on the risks that climate change and natural disasters pose to the housing finance system. We submitted short comments and attached our report with the Environmental Defense Fund, Mandating Disclosure of Climate-Related Financial Risk, which surveys the variety of risks that U.S. corporations, including those in the housing sector, face from climate change’s physical effects and policy and market consequences.
-
Comments on Interior’s Review of Oil and Gas Program
The Department of the Interior is conducting a review of its federal oil and gas leasing program. We submitted comments encouraging the Interior to pursue concurrent action on three fronts.
-
Comments to USPS on Purchase of Delivery Vehicles
The United States Postal Service (USPS) announced that it will prepare an environmental impact statement for the purchase of a mix of gas-powered and electrict delivery vehicles. We submitted comments on how the USPS can incorporate climate impacts into its review by using the social cost of greenhouse gases. We also urge the USPS to consider the alternative of an all zero-emission fleet.
-
Gauging Economic Consensus on Climate Change – Issue Brief
We conducted a large-sample global survey on climate economics, which we sent to all economists who have published climate-related research in the field’s highest-ranked academic journals; 738 responded. To our knowledge, this is the largest-ever expert survey on the economics of climate change. The results show an overwhelming consensus that the costs of inaction on climate change are higher than the costs of action, and that immediate, aggressive emissions reductions are economically desirable.
This Issue Brief highlights key takeaways from the survey. A more detailed report is available here.
Viewing recent projects in Climate and Energy Policy