-
Comments to FERC on PJM Reserve Market Reforms
PJM, the regional organization that manages wholesale electricity and the transmission grid in 13 eastern states, recently proposed a number of changes to its operating reserve market in an effort to improve its pricing mechanism. We submitted comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) supporting PJM’s proposal and recommending additional changes.
-
Comments on Georgia’s Electric Utility Resource Plan
Georgia Power Company recently published its 2019 electric utility resource plan, which includes projected future costs of different energy generation programs. We submitted comments asking that Georgia Power more clearly quantify and monetize the greenhouse gas emissions of electricity generation alternatives.
-
Comments on Repeal of Payday Lending Rule
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is proposing to repeal a rule that protects borrowers from exploitative payday lending practices. We submitted comments focusing on CFPB’s failure to provide a reasoned explanation for reversing key legal and economic conclusions of the rule.
-
Reply Comments to the FCC on Mitigating Space Debris
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) called for input on possible market-based approaches to regulating orbital debris, like small but dangerous fragments from the launch, operation, and disintegration of satellites. We previously submitted comments that included an initial discussion of what the FCC might consider in choosing a market-based regulation. Our reply comments expand on this discussion, outlining specific steps the FCC can take to assess implementing a market-based solution.
-
Comments to BLM on Environmental Impacts of Federal Oil and Gas Leases
In response to a District Court order, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently prepared a Supplemental Environmental Assessment (EA) for five federal oil and gas leasing decisions issued in 2015 and 2016. We submitted comments that focus on the agency’s failure to adequately quantify greenhouse gas emissions and monetize their climate impacts.
-
Comments to EPA on Reconsideration of Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to withdraw a prior finding that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate power-sector emissions of mercury and other “air toxics” under the Clean Air Act. We submitted comments arguing that EPA has failed to provide a reasoned explanation for this change of course.
-
Comments on California Public Utilities Commission’s New Analysis Framework
We recently encouraged the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to clarify aspects of its new process for evaluating the social costs and benefits of energy resources. As we discussed in prior comments, the proposed analysis framework, the Societal Cost Test (SCT), will help the Commission to make investments that provide the greatest welfare benefits. Our new comments ask CPUC to provide some additional information in the SCT proposal.
-
Comments on the Replacement of the Clean Water Rule
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers are proposing to replace the 2015 Clean Water Rule with a new rule that would harm many waterways by removing critical federal protections. We submitted comments detailing how the agencies provide flawed analysis in support of the proposal. Dr. Peter Howard and Dr. Jeffrey Shrader also submitted an expert report detailing the flaws in the agencies’ new valuation of wetland benefits.
-
Comments to DOE on Energy Conservation Standards for Direct Heating Equipment
The Department of Energy (DOE) recently issued a request for information on the energy conservation standards for direct heating equipment. We submitted comments that advise the Department to monetize climate benefits from greenhouse gas emissions reductions and discuss market-based approaches to energy conservation standards.
-
Comments to the FCC on Regulation of Space Debris
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is seeking comments on economic approaches that might be feasible and effective in reducing the negative impacts of orbital debris in space. We submitted comments offering initial suggestions for what the Commission might consider in choosing a market-based regulation. We also recommend that any impact assessment of the regulation takes into account the full range of direct and indirect benefits.
Viewing recent projects in Public Comments