Menu
Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Recent Projects

Viewing recent projects in Public Comments
  • Comments to New Jersey BPU on Resource Adequacy Alternatives

    The New Jersey Bureau of Public Utilities (BPU) requested public input on its investigation of resource adequacy alternatives. We submitted comments encouraging the New Jersey BPU to recognize important uncertainties affecting the proceeding, consider a broad range of costs of pursuing a Fixed Resource Requirement, and explore the possibility of a carbon pricing program in addition to participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

    Read more

  • Joint Comments to CFTC on Climate-Related Market Risk

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) requested public input on issues relevant to its Climate-Related Market Risk Subcommittee. We submitted joint comments highlighting the significant financial risks that climate change poses and emphasizing that an economy-wide price on carbon emissions is the regulatory tool that will be the most effective in mitigating a climate-related financial crisis.

    Read more

  • Comments to PHMSA on Data Collection from Pipeline Accidents

    The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is proposing to gather additional data on pipeline accidents and fires, including data on injuries, property damage, and loss of natural gas. We submitted comments supporting PHMSA’s efforts to better assess the social cost of accidents and encouraging the agency to estimate greenhouse gas emissions that result from pipeline fires.

    Read more

  • Comments to SEC on Regulation S-K and Climate Risk

    The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposed a rule modifying Regulation S-K, which governs reporting requirements for public companies. We submitted comments focusing on the SEC’s failure to require disclosure of risks relating to climate change. Climate risks are economy-wide impacts in which the future increasingly diverges from past experience, and predicting such risks requires more granular data than is typically disclosed in financial reporting. We suggest that the SEC adopt a more specific line-item approach to climate risk reporting, similar to the framework suggested under the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures.

    Read more

  • Comments to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission on Electricity Rule Changes

    The Colorado Public Utilities Commission is amending its rules relating to utilities, electric resource planning, and renewable energy standards. We submitted comments explaining why the Commission should use Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases estimates to monetize the externalities of carbon pollution. Our recommendations include rule revisions and new language that will help include monetized estimates of climate impacts in all relevant decisionmaking. We also submitted comments and reply comments on additional rule revisions, building on our original comments to further describe how the Commission can best express and apply the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases.

    Read more

  • Comments to FERC Supporting Petition for Technical Conference on Carbon Pricing

    Advanced Energy Economy, the Electric Power Suppliers Association, and a diverse group of other stakeholders recently filed a petition for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to hold a technical conference on carbon pricing in organized wholesale electricity markets. We have worked extensively to study and promote carbon pricing, publishing a comprehensive report and several academic articles. We also hosted a conference that brought together experts and stakeholders to discuss related legal, economic, and policy questions. Our comments to FERC highlight our previous work on wholesale market carbon pricing and express our support for the requested technical conference.

    Read more

  • Comments to FERC on Lamar County Natural Gas Project

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) environmental assessment estimates that the Lamar County Expansion Project would result in 3.87 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from downstream emissions. We submitted comments suggesting that FERC monetize climate impacts using social cost of carbon estimates. The proposed natural gas project would result in over $200 million in annual climate costs.  

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Coal Combustion Residuals Rule

    Coal combustion residuals, commonly known as coal ash, are the residual substances that remain after burning coal. They contain several chemicals that are toxic to human health, including arsenic, boron, lead, and mercury. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a rule that amends the regulatory framework for the disposal of coal ash. We submitted comments in January detailing how EPA fails to analyze the forgone benefits of the regulatory changes, which extend deadlines and eligibility for facilities that lack appropriate disposal capacity. We also submitted comments in April focusing on the second part of EPA's proposal, which fails to assess the forgone benefits of allowing facilities to seek approval for alternative basin liners. 

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Federal Emissions Management from Oil and Gas Sources in Utah

    The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for managing emissions on the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in Utah proposes control requirements for new, modified, and existing oil and natural gas sources. Despite forecasting that the requirements would lead to a substantial decrease in methane emissions, EPA severely underestimates resulting benefits through the use of an “interim” social cost of methane metric that disregards the best peer-reviewed science. We submitted joint comments detailing EPA’s failure to adequately monetize and evaluate the benefits of the FIP.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Lead and Copper Regulation Revisions

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed revisions to the National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for lead and copper. Our comments ask EPA to more fully monetize the benefits and better assess the significance of non-monetized benefits of the proposal. We also submitted a letter to EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) summarizing our comments and encouraging the SAB to consider our points during its review of the proposed revisions.

    Read more