It was about a year ago that we posted a bit of analysis on the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) independent look at the economic and energy market impacts of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan (CPP) proposed rule. You can probably get a hint what we found out from the title—EIA Analysis Shows EPA’s Carbon Regulations All Economic Pain for No Climate Gain. We concluded that:
Take a look at the chart below, which was taken from a presentation made by Jim Skea, Co-Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group III, to the Parties to UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) here in Bonn, Germany last week.
The curved line depicts what Mr. Skea describes as the increase in the “level of effort, as measured by carbon price” needed to limit the increase in the average global surface to no more than 2.0°C, the aspirational goal in the Paris Agreement. That’s some steep curve!
Remember when President Obama said, “[W]ith only 2% of the world’s oil reserves [Actually, America’s crude oil resource is among the largest in the world.], we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices – not when we consume 20 percent of the world’s oil.” Well the president’s own Department of Energy (DOE) begs to differ.
Many countries will be signing the Paris Agreement on climate change this Earth Day. The overall aspirational goal of the agreement is as follows:
This Agreement . . . aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by . . . [h]olding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
Good morning Congressman Pallone, Ranking Member Walden, and members of the Committee. My name is Christopher Guith and I am the Acting President of the Global Energy Institute, an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (“the Chamber”). The mission of the Global Energy Institute is to unify policymakers, regulators, business leaders, and the American public behind a common-sense energy strategy to help keep America secure, prosperous, and clean.
Christopher Guith, acting president of the U.S. Chamber’s Global Energy Institute, issued the following statement regarding EPA Administrator Wheeler’s recent directive on Cost-Benefit Analyses Memorandum.