Recent Projects

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission requested responses to a number of questions on the effects of climate change and electric system reliability. In April 2021, we submitted comments highlighting opportunities to improve reliability and resilience by adjusting approaches the Commission and others take to planning, investing in, and operating grid components.

Then FERC, following a technical conference over the summer, requested further comments on a specific series of questions. In September 2021, we submitted joint comments describing process options and resources for conducting climate resilience planning, and emphasized how accounting for climate impacts is relevant to consumer costs.

We submitted comments on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) notice of proposed rulemaking, Revised 2023 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards. Our comment urged EPA to: select the regulatory alternative that will maximize net social welfare and promote distributional justice; rely on legislative and regulatory history to help justify its aproach to lead time; and improve its modeling to more fully capture benefits of stronger standards.

We also submitted joint comments with a coalition of other environmental groups on EPA's use of the social cost of carbon (SCC) in its proposed regulation, recommending that the agency expand its justification its discount rates and inclusion of global damages in the SCC, and affirm that the SCC is a lower bound of projected climate impacts.

In the aftermath of summer storms that resulted in widespread and prolonged power outages, Michigan's Public Service Commission requested comments on whether utilities should continue to rely exclusively on historical data when planning for extreme events. In comments filed jointly with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, and the Initiative for Climate Risk and Resilience Law, Policy Integrity suggested processes and tools that the Commission should direct utilities to use to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities to the impacts of extreme weather and climate change impacts more generally.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") sets corporate average fuel economy ("CAFE") standards for light-duty vehicles, and penalizes automobile manufacturers who fail to meet applicable standards. In January 2021, NHTSA issued an Interim Final Rule repealing the inflation-adjusted penalty increase for Model Years 2019-2021, which we commented was untimely and disregarded critical environmental harms. 

In August 2021, NHTSA proposed to rescind the Interim Final Rule. We filed comments supporting the proposal for complying with inflation-adjustment obligations, driving fuel savings, and reducing pollution.

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.

We submitted comments to FERC today providing suggested topics for the first meeting of the joint federal-state task force on transmission. Our comments respond to a request for topics related to barriers inhibiting more efficient and effective transmission planning and deployment. We identify two barriers that the task force should discuss -- jurisdictional issues related to transmission siting and the lack of a standardized cost benefit analysis rubric for transmission projects.

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 Evangeline Pass Expansion Project EIS. Two companies have requested authorization to construct and operate a new pipeline, compressor stations and meter stations in Louisiana and Mississippi, which will be used to transport up to 1,100,000 dekatherms per day to an LNG facility for export.

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.