Publications

The government’s flood insurance program gives discounts to homeowners who build in flood-prone areas, often causing significant environmental damage. In this analysis, the Institute for Policy Integrity finds that this practice can benefit wealthy owners of expensive homes at a cost to the average taxpayer.

The CLEAR Act, sponsored in the Senate by Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME), would place a price on carbon, auction 100% of the pollution permits, and refund most of the revenue back to consumers. This brief found that pricing carbon would spur investment and innovation in new energy technologies, giving a substantial boost to industries like manufacturing and construction—both hit hard in the recent financial crisis. Relatively well-paying jobs would be generated in these sectors, helping to mop up the slack created by the recession.

Economists and Climate Change: Consensus and Open Questions describes and analyzes the results of a survey sent to 289 economic experts on climate change. Over 84% of the respondents to the poll said that the effects of global warming will create significant risks to important sectors of the United States and global economies.

This brief compiles estimates from several different federal agencies, and calculates that the economic benefits of the emissions cap in the Waxman-Markey bill likely dwarf the costs by as much as 9-to-1 or more. The benefit to cost ratio was determined using the EPA’s previously released (and peer reviewed) cost estimates and a newly released “social cost of carbon” estimate from an interagency process which provides a conservative dollar figure for the benefits of greenhouse gas reductions.

No More Excuses: The Economic Case for Coal Ash Regulation is a brief but careful analysis which reveals several compelling findings on the regulation of the toxic by-product of coal combustion. In broad strokes, it is clear that the benefits of regulating coal ash storage facilities would far outweigh the costs. The benefits of a regulation requiring coal ash to be stored in dry conditions and in synthetically-lined, covered facilities could save tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars per storage facility.