Recent Projects

On January 20, 2022 the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources hosted a remote oversight hearing titled, “What More Gulf of Mexico Oil and Gas Leasing Means for Achieving U.S. Climate Targets.” Witnesses included Policy Integrity's Max Sarinsky, whose full testimony is available here. Watch the hearing recording here.

We submitted post-technical conference comments to FERC regarding its authority to consider greenhouse gas emissions and to impose mitigation conditions in assessing whether to grant a certificate of public convenience and necessity for interstate natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure projects. Our comments also recommend that the Commission prescribe reasonable default estimates for calculating emissions and monetize climate damages using the social cost of greenhouse gases to assess the project's climate impacts under NEPA and balance them against benefits under the NGA.

The Bureau of Land Management's approval of over 300 drilling permits in New Mexico would allow for an increase in production resulting in more than $1.6 billion in climate damages. We filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit criticizing the agency's analysis of the project, which inappropriately minimizes these climate impacts through comparison to nationwide totals. We explain that this approach does not facilitate a rational analysis of the project's climate effects.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”) recently released an environmental impact statement (“EIS”) for its proposal to lease more than one million acres of submerged land on the Alaska Outer Continental Shelf for oil and gas development. BOEM proposes to take this action despite estimating that it could lead to more than $1.3 billion in climate damages, and despite presenting no estimate of the economic benefits, against which these climate costs might be compared.

We filed a comment letter with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regarding their continued failures to meaningfully assess the climate impacts of natural gas infrastructure projects, this time regarding the Alberta Xpress Project DEIS. The project will contribute up to 3.31 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year in operational and downstream emissions, and it could cause at least $3.33 billion in climate costs over the twenty-one-year precedent agreement underlying it.

Policy Integrity's Economics Director Peter Howard joined climate scientists and economic experts in written testimony to the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) about the significance of excessive greenhouse gas emissions that would be generated if Enbridge’s Line 5 tunnel siting permit is approved. Howard explained that “the Proposed Project will generate a present value of $41 billion (in 2020 dollars) or more in net monetized climate costs from 2027 to 2070 as compared to the no-action alternative – in other words, the Proposed Project will generate average annual monetized climate costs of approximately $1 billion each year over this period, plus significant unmonetized climate effects and other unquantified pollution costs to human health and the environment.”

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have expressed the intention to repeal the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, which removed critical federal protections on many waterways and has been vacated by a federal court for violating the Clean Water Act. In comments filed to the agencies, we welcome the decision to replace the rule but encourage strong justification for reversing course and point to flaws in the economic analysis for the earlier rule that can support the case for replacing it.

We previously commented on the rule and its flawed economic justification, published a report on its concealed costs, and filed amicus briefs in court cases that challenged it.

The North Baja XPress Project would provide a significant increase in natural gas compression and transportation, potentially resulting in 9.5 million metric tons or more in downstream greenhouse gas emissions. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, however, failed to estimate the project’s total emissions and climate damages. In October 2020, we submitted comments recommending that FERC consider the full range of upstream and downstream emissions and contextualize their impacts using the social cost of carbon.

In our August 2021 follow up letter responding to FERC's draft environmental impact statement for the project, we note that the Commission has taken the helpful steps of quantifying direct and downstream emissions, but should still quantify upstream emissions, assess the project's incremental environmental harms, and consider avenues to mitigate emissions.

The East 300 Upgrade Project could result in the emission of over 2.3 million tons of downstream emissions in carbon-dioxide equivalence per year from the combusion of natural gas. In March, we submitted comments encouraging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to provide a more complete analysis of project emissions and weigh its climate impacts using the social cost of carbon. In August, we followed up with a comment letter regarding the Commission's continued failures to meaningfully assess climate impacts in the project's Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

The East Lateral XPress Project could result in the emission of over 3.6 million tons of downstream emissions in carbon-dioxide equivalence per year from the combustion of natural gas. We submitted comments (April 2021) and a follow-up letter (August 2021) encouraging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to provide a more complete analysis of project emissions, weigh its climate impacts using the social cost of carbon, and consider mitigation measures.