This working paper constructs a new general equilibrium model of the U.S. economy that is better able to analyze energy and gross receipts taxes than previous models.

On May 22, the House of Representatives passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, which specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense and sets the policies under which money (somewhat in excess of $600 billion) will be spent on our country’s defense. However, an amendment added to the bill will keep the Department of Defense from preparing for or performing any military activities that include any construction related to climate change.

Speaking from the historic steps of Old North on the Georgetown University campus on June 25, 2013, President Obama unveiled a detailed plan to address the causes and impacts of climate change. In his words, the president promised, “I’m directing the Environmental Protection Agency to put an end to the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from our power plants, and complete new pollution standards for both new and existing power plants.” Not quite a year later on June 6, 2014, Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, responded by proposing “state-specific rate-based goals for carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector, as well as guidelines for states to follow in developing plans to achieve the state-specific goals.”

The recently released National Climate Assessment documents the accelerating rate of climate change caused by human activities, leading to extensive and damaging impacts. The report represents scientific findings on the state of climate change in the United States, summarized in a way that is accessible to its intended audience: the president, members of Congress, and the American people, writes Ron Sass, fellow in global climate change. Will the U.S. Congress respond actively to the report rather than do nothing, as it has in the past? Sass is not sure, but writes that “it is up to the American people to inform themselves and then vote into power those who have the ability and desire to understand the seriousness of the changing climate and are willing to work together to confront it.”

Fossil fuel subsidies have allowed energy exporting countries to distribute resource revenue, bolstering legitimacy for governments, many of which are not democratically elected. But subsidy benefits are dwarfed by the harmful consequences of encouraging uneconomic use of energy. Now, with consumption posing a threat to long-term exports, governments face a heightened need to raise prices that have come to be viewed as entitlements. While reforms of state benefits are notoriously politically dangerous, previous experience shows that subsidies can be rolled back without undermining government legitimacy — even in autocratic settings — given proper preparation.

To access the full paper, download the PDF here.

Executive Summary

In 2009, Abu Dhabi launched a drive into renewable…

This research discerns how municipal solid waste (MSW) composition influences the heating value and air pollution for the co-combustion of coal with MSW using five MSW composition scenarios, four of which were derived by a reduction of plastics, organics, paper, or a combination thereof, as compared to the national average MSW composition.

A paper that briefly examines the current situation and outlook for
 shale gas in China, and explores existing and potential 
avenues for international cooperation. Published by the International Shale Gas and Oil Journal Subscription required.

This testimony was delivered before the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on February 12, 2013.

 

…