Assuming the rule survives judicial review, under the Clean Power Plan different utilities and power producers are likely to be in different positions. Some will benefit from the rule, and others will face high compliance costs, which can lead to monetary transfers among different producers and consumers of electricity. A new Nicholas Institute policy brief explores the distributional impacts of choosing rate- and mass-based approaches to comply with the Clean Power Plan. It finds that states adopting a mass-based compliance approach can use allowance allocation to largely control monetary transfers within a state. Meanwhile, states adopting a rate-based compliance approach lack this direct control mechanism. In addition, each state's system of electricity regulation and any changes in wholesale prices for electricity due to the policy in regional electricity markets will play a major role in determining how cost distribution and potential transfers play out.
The Clean Power Plan is likely to intensify the electricity industry's already-underway shift from coal-fired generation to natural gas and renewables generation. A new working paper by researchers at Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions uses our Dynamic Integrated Economy/Energy/Emissions Model to evaluate electricity industry trends and Clean Power Plan impacts on the U.S. generation mix, emissions, and industry costs. It suggests that industry trends are likely to make Clean Power Plan compliance relatively inexpensive; cost increases are likely to be on the order of 0.1% to 1.0%. However, policy costs can vary substantially across states and may lead some of them to adopt a patchwork of policies that, although in their own best interests, could impose additional costs on neighboring states. Read a Q&A with the lead author and register to attend a webinar on the results at 10 a.m. ET August 16. 
Successful landscape-scale forest conservation and management efforts must engage owners of large (>10,000-acre) forestlands. A new Nicholas Institute proceedings captures the insights of some of those owners as well as those of federal, NGO, and academic thought leaders on improving engagement on an "all-lands" approach to conservation--an approach whereby landowners and stakeholders collaborate on identifying long-term, mutually beneficial goals. Participants pointed to the need to build the business case for conservation and to align the incentive-based approaches of funding agencies with the interests of forestland owners.
August 24, Pacific Grove, California
September 13, Atlanta, Georgia
Ongoing Evolution of the Electricity Industry: Effects of Market Conditions and the Clean Power Plan on States
August 16, Webinar  
2017 Winter Forum: Power to the People: Tackling Energy Inequality Through Clean Energy Solutions
January 8-10, 2017, Durham, North Carolina
Transport of Hydraulic Fracturing Waste

In a new study published in the Journal of Environmental Management, researchers report that transportation of waste associated with the development of unconventional oil and gas in Pennsylvania increases the cost of road repairs not only in Pennsylvania but extends to counties in the states of West Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, and New York. Between July 2010 and December 2013, the estimated cost to repair roads damaged by trucks transporting unconventional oil and gas waste ranged from $3 million to $18 million. Although the majority of these costs were concentrated in Pennsylvania (79 percent), costs were spread to surrounding states, particularly Ohio counties (16 percent). View an interactive graphic of the data.
EnergyWire, Study Finds 'Relatively Inexpensive' State Compliance Costs ($)
ClimateWire, Regulators Weigh Net Metering; ALEC won't Consider CPP Bills ($)

Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
View our profile on LinkedIn
View our videos on YouTube