Recent Projects

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) asked for comments on its straw proposal for the benefit-cost test that BPU would employ pursuant to the 2018 Clean Energy Act, which requires energy efficiency and peak demand reduction programs to satisfy a benefit-cost test. We submitted comments encouraging BPU to include avoided greenhouse gas emissions among the non-energy benefits it credits to energy efficiency and peak demand reduction projects. We also suggest that BPU adopt a tool and methodology for assessing the benefit of avoided local air pollutants that is more sensitive than those identified in the proposal. 

We submitted joint comments to EPA and the chartered Science Advisory Board noting that the proposal is unnecessary and explaining how it breaks from best practices for cost-benefit analysis of regulations in several significant ways.

The Virginia State Corporation Commission asked for input in advance of developing a rule for energy storage deployment. Our comments note that energy storage deployment can increase emissions from the electricity sector, even if those deployments also facilitate the integration of variable renewable resources. We urge the Commission, under the Virginia Clean Economy Act, to adopt a rule ensuring that energy storage resources are deployed and operated in ways that reduce net emissions.  

A proposed oil and gas lease sale in Utah would offer over 100,000 acres located in areas valuable for recreation, wildlife, environmental conservation, cultural use, and tourism. We submitted comments detailing how the Bureau of Land Management’s environmental assessment neglects its duties to manage public lands for multiple use and consider more limited leasing scenarios. BLM also ignores the option value of delaying the leasing decision and, therefore, is unlikely to obtain fair market value for the nominated land parcels.

The Department of Energy (DOE) asked for input on conducting its national impact analysis, including on market failures, its emissions analysis, and monetization of benefits of emissions reductions. We submitted comments suggesting that DOE continue to monetize the full climate benefits of emissions reductions using the best available estimates of the social cost of greenhouse gases. 

The Department of Energy (DOE) asked for input on conducting its national impact analysis, including on market failures, its emissions analysis, and monetization of benefits of emissions reductions. We submitted comments suggesting that DOE continue to monetize the full climate benefits of emissions reductions using the best available estimates of the social cost of greenhouse gases. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend the 2015 New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for residential wood heating devices, purporting to respond to retailer needs in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our comments detail how how the proposal contradicts the Clean Air Act’s mandate and longstanding agency guidance. The proposed rule will, even under the agencies’ own analysis, cause net harms to the public without providing any reasonable justification.

The Oklahoma Health Care Authority has requested permission from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to change the state’s Medicaid program in a variety of ways—including by introducing work requirements and premium payments for some beneficiaries. We filed comments opposing the request and explaining why the benefits, if any, of work and cost-sharing requirements are unlikely to justify the accompanying health and administrative costs.

The New England Ratepayers Association (NERA) recently petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to effectively overturn net metering policies nationwide. While FERC has previously and definitively answered the jurisdictional question concerning net metering, NERA asserts without evidence that controversy persists. We submitted comments describing the flaws of NERA’s argument and urging FERC to reject the petition.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) asked for public input on a forthcoming report to Congress regarding strategies for ensuring an adequate blood supply during public health emergencies. Our comments recommended that the report endorse elimination of the Food and Drug Administration’s deferral policy for donations from men who have sex with men. The policy, which bars gay and bisexual men from donating blood for three months from the date of their last sexual contact, relies on outdated science regarding HIV transmission risk, stigmatizes gay and bisexual men, and increases the likelihood of blood shortages.