Search Results for
667 item(s) were returned.
Discussion

What are the Implications of Exiting Paris?

Author(s): OurEnergyPolicy.org
Administrator
OurEnergyPolicy.org
Date: May 23, 2017 at 9:00 AM

President Trump is expected to make a decision after the impending G7 summit regarding whether the U.S. will remain a party to the Paris Climate Agreement. For weeks, the President has been formerly considering whether America should withdraw from the Paris Agreement signed in 2015 and ratified by his predecessor, President Obama, last year. Under the Agreement, the U.S. committed to an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to reduce emissions by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2025. Once in effect, terms of the Agreement state a party cannot withdraw for at least 3 years and must wait an additional… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Opportunities for Carbon Capture in California

Author(s): Fatima Maria Ahmad
Solutions Fellow
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions
Date: May 9, 2017 at 11:00 AM

California has demonstrated leadership in setting ambitious goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by setting a target to reduce emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. While California is reducing emissions and expanding clean energy through many means, including a cap-and-trade program, the state appears to be underestimating the effectiveness and readiness of carbon capture technology and how it could help California reach its goal. In consensus comments on the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) draft 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, a diverse group of nonprofits (including C2ES); environmental groups; and oil, gas, and ethanol companies outlined… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Global Energy Outlooks Comparison Methods

Author(s): OurEnergyPolicy.org
Administrator
OurEnergyPolicy.org
Date: May 1, 2017 at 12:11 PM

Full Title: Global Energy Outlooks Comparison Methods Author(s): Richard G. Newell and Stu Iler Publisher(s): Resources for the Future Publication Date: 02/2017 Full Text: ->DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT<- Description (excerpt): We update a harmonization methodology previously developed in 2015 to facilitate comparisons of long-term global energy projections issued by the International Energy Agency, US Energy Information Administration, ExxonMobil, BP and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. We continue to find important differences across outlooks in the primary energy units used, the assumed energy content of fossil fuels, the assumed efficiency of nuclear and renewable electricity conversion from primary energy, the categorization of… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Where Should Electricity Investment Go?

Author(s): Jennifer Morris
Research Scientist
MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change
Date: at 10:00 AM

With a single executive order issued at the end of March, the Trump administration launched a robust effort to roll back Obama-era climate policies designed to reduce U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Chief among those policies is the Clean Power Plan, which targets coal and natural gas-fired electric power plants that account for about 40 percent of the nation’s CO2 emissions. Private and public-sector investors may see the executive order as a green light to double down on relatively cheap fossil fuels and reduce holdings in more costly, climate-friendly, non-carbon generation technologies such as wind, solar and nuclear. But they… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Energy Reset: Free Markets vs. Government Influence

Author(s): James Koehler
Associate Director
Berkeley Research Group
Date: April 24, 2017 at 11:00 AM

The National Capital Area Chapter for the U.S. Association for Energy Economics (NCAC-USAEE) held its annual energy policy conference on April 6th entitled “Energy Reset? Conflicting Forces in the Energy Space.” The event captured the economic implications of the announced and expected shift in energy policy between the Obama and Trump administrations. One reoccurring theme was the evolving role of government and market influences. It began with Thad Hill, CEO and President of Calpine Corp., emphasizing the need for “markets not mandates” and Tom Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance, detailing President Trump’s energy deregulation agenda. A panel on… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Will Trump’s Plan To Bring Back Coal Jobs Work?

Author(s): Greg Gershuny
Interim Director, Energy and Environment Program
The Aspen Institute
Date: April 10, 2017 at 12:00 PM

Coal isn’t coming back although with real investment in carbon capture and sequestration, it could continue to contribute to a clean energy economy. In 2006, coal accounted for nearly half of all electricity in the US; by 2016, it was down to 29%. The decrease in coal by the electricity sector is because of economic reasons, as it has been outcompeted by low cost natural gas. Building new wind and utility scale solar generation is less expensive than building new coal plants, even without subsidies. States are already decarbonizing. The Clean Power Plan, the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation to limit… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

The Effects of Energy Tax Policy on Markets and the Environment

Author(s): Devin Hartman
President & CEO
The Electricity Consumers Resource Council
Date: April 3, 2017 at 10:30 AM

The Federal government supports energy investment and production through the tax code and spending programs administered by the Department of Energy (DOE). In 2016, energy-related tax preferences cost an estimated $18.4 billion, while relevant DOE spending programs cost $5.9 billion. DOE programs advance knowledge benefits, which the private sector underproduces because companies cannot capture all the benefits for themselves. Early-stage research and development (R&D) has the largest “knowledge spillovers,” yet DOE direct investments in applied (late stage) energy research is more than double those in basic (early stage) research. Tax preferences may encourage knowledge benefits for nascent technologies but deter… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Reconsidering the Indian Point Nuclear Plant Shutdown

Author(s): Herschel Specter
President
Micro-Utilities, Inc.
Date: March 27, 2017 at 9:30 AM

In January, New York Governor Cuomo, Riverkeeper, an environmental group, and Entergy, a nuclear utility, announced a joint agreement to shut down the two nuclear reactors at Indian Point (IP) by April 2021. Replacement power will be provided by clean energy sources consistent with New York’s Clean Energy Standard, which requires 50% of the State’s electricity to come from renewable energy by 2030. It is claimed that this can be achieved with a negligible cost to ratepayers. The plant currently provides carbon-free and low cost electricity for about one quarter of the power consumed by New York City and Westchester… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Withdrawing Federal Funding for ENERGY STAR

Author(s): Scott Sklar
President
The Stella Group, LTD
Date: March 20, 2017 at 10:30 AM

This month, reports surfaced that critical energy savings programs like ENERGY STAR could be defunded as part of the Trump Administration’s FY’18 budget. Last week, the President’s Budget Blueprint confirmed the rumors to be true. According to E&E news, a draft of the proposed budget cuts contained language stating “EPA should begin developing legislative options and associated groundwork for transferring ownership and implementation of ENERGY STAR to a non-governmental entity.”  Today, millions of consumers and businesses choose ENERGY STAR—demonstrating that the program has earned credibility in the marketplace. When the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency developed the… [more]

View Discussion
Discussion

Border Adjustment Tax: Will Consumers Pay At The Pump?

Author(s): Robert Grant
Director of International Public Policy and Advocacy
Global Innovation Policy Center, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Date: March 13, 2017 at 10:45 AM

In June 2016, House Republicans introduced their vision for comprehensive tax reform. Premised on a simpler, fairer code than today’s, the GOP’s plan looks to promote economic growth and create jobs. It also proposes taxing imports at 20%. As part of the plan, Republican Speaker Ryan introduced a border adjustment tax (BAT) that taxes imports but excludes exports. The Tax Foundation concluded that a BAT could generate roughly $1 trillion in revenue over the next decade. According to some oil market experts, “the bottom line with a BAT is the price of crude oil rises.” And with almost a fifth… [more]

View Discussion