Energy Policy Now

U.S. corporations increasingly look to manage their carbon footprints, and energy costs, by entering into clean energy power purchase agreements (PPAs). The contracts offer a tailwind to renewable energy developers, but can challenge traditional utility-customer relationships. --- Ninety-five percent of the world’s largest 250 companies by revenue issue sustainability reports that disclose their environmental and social impact. On the energy front, this often translates into companies setting goals for clean energy use, with Google, Microsoft and Wal-Mart having set 100% clean energy targets for parts of their businesses. As companies look to aggressively reduce their carbon footprint, some are taking the step of making direct investments in clean energy projects through contracts known as wind and solar Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), under which they buy electricity directly from clean energy generators. Such deals ensure that clean energy purchases pass the additionality test, yet can disrupt traditional utility-customer relationships. Energy legal and regulatory expert Ken Kulak provides insights into corporate America’s efforts to clean up its electricity supply, even as the bulk of America’s electric generation continues to be powered by fossil fuels. Ken Kulak is Partner with the Morgan Lewis law firm in Philadelphia, and a Senior Fellow with the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy. Related Content Utilities Continue Coal Retreat, Advance on Gas and Renewables https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/12/13/part-3-utilities-continue-coal-retreat-advance-gas-and-renewables Tilting at Windmills https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/tilting-windmillsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Energy Department’s proposal to shore up coal and nuclear power plants could undermine the very foundations of competitive electricity markets. PJM Interconnection’s Stu Bresler, SVP for Operations and Markets, weighs in on DOE’s proposal, and explains PJM’s price formation alternative. --- In October, Department of Energy secretary Rick Perry grabbed the attention of US competitive wholesale electricity markets when he issued an unusual request to the federal agency tasked with overseeing these markets, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Perry’s proposal, known as the resiliency NOPR (or Notice of Proposed Rulemaking), asked that subsidies be paid to electricity generators that the Energy Department maintains are critical to the resilient operation of the electricity system. More specifically, the subsidies would go to coal and nuclear power plants that can store a 90-day supply of fuel on-site. DOE maintains that this would ensure the plants’ continued operation in the event of fuel supply disruptions, for example during extreme weather. But the move to favor certain generators threatens to undermine competitive market principles that are the foundation of electricity markets. It could also disadvantage other forms of generation, mainly natural gas and renewables which, the Energy Secretary maintains, are less resilient. PJM Interconnection, the largest competitive electricity market, has been outspoken in its concerns around the DOE proposal and the resiliency assumptions that underlie it. In this episode, PJM’s Stu Bresler, Senior Vice President for Operations and Markets, presents PJM’s alternative proposal, which aims to reform the way prices are set in energy markets. Critically from PJM’s perspective, it’s price formation reforms would preserve market-based principles. PJM’s proposed plan would increase revenues to electric generators, ultimately benefitting the same endangered coal and nuclear plants that the DOE aims to support. The Kleinman Center’s Christina Simeone, Director of Policy and External Affairs, who has written extensively on issues related to PJM, and handles the questioning. Related Content Initial Questions on PJM’s Price Formation Proposal http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/11/21/initial-questions-pjm’s-price-formation-proposal What the Heck is “Enhanced Price Formation” in PJM http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/11/21/what-heck-“enhanced-price-formation”-pjm PJM Governance http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/pjm-governance Department of Energy Grid Resiliency Pricing Rule NOPR https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/09/f37/Notice%20of%20Proposed%20Rulemaking%20.pdf Initial Comments of PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. on the United States Department of Energy Proposed Rule http://www.pjm.com/-/media/documents/ferc/filings/2017/20171023-rm-18-1-000.ashx DOE Staff Report to the Secretary on Electricity Markets and Reliability https://energy.gov/downloads/download-staff-report-secretary-electricity-markets-and-reliabilitySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mass migration to India’s cities will triple the size of its built environment by 2030, driving up energy use and carbon emissions. An expert on India’s energy sector looks at the country’s efforts to balance development and climate impact. --- Few countries face the challenge of balancing economic development and climate change as acutely as India, and in no other country is this balance likely to directly impact the lives of so many people. Over the next decade, some 200 million rural Indians will move to urban centers. Many will join the middle class, creating new demand for goods and energy while tripling the size of India’s built environment. At the same time, rising temperatures and the desertification of India’s agricultural regions will challenge the country’s ability to feed itself. Energy Policy Now guest Radhika Khosla, Visiting Scholar at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, looks at India’s growing demand for energy, and at how the development decisions the country makes today will to a large extent lock in place its energy needs and climate impact for decades to come. Radhika Khosla is a Fellow at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, India and India Fellow at the Oxford India Centre for Sustainable Development at the University of Oxford. She is also a visiting scholar at the MIT Energy Initiative, and a former Staff Scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. Related Content: Energy Transformation and Air Quality in India http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/11/10/energy-transformation-and-air-quality-india Aligning Local Logic with Global Need http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/aligning-local-logic-global-needSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Owners of rooftop solar could soon begin selling power into wholesale electricity markets, the traditional domain of big coal, gas and nuclear generators. The catch: electricity markets need to get fully behind the switch. --- America’s electricity system is undergoing dramatic change, in particular as distributed energy resources – notably rooftop solar and battery storage – become more common. Taken in aggregate, total rooftop solar and electricity storage now equals the generation potential of several traditional power plants. As these resources grow more popular, their potential to impact the larger electricity system also grows. Accordingly, some in the electricity industry have recognized the potential for distributed energy to participate in the same competitive, wholesale electricity markets that have been the domain of large nuclear, gas and coal generators. Ari Peskoe, Senior Fellow in Electricity Law at the Harvard Law School Environmental Law Policy Program Initiative, weighs in on the growth opportunity that wholesale markets can provide to distributed electricity, and at the policy and economic challenges that remain to their participation in these markets. Ari Peskoe is a Visiting Scholar at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy and Senior Fellow in Electricity Law at the Harvard Law School Environmental Law Policy Program Initiative. Earlier, as an energy attorney, he litigated cases before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Related Content: So What Are Utilities Doing About Storage? http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/10/27/so-what-are-utilities-doing-about-storage A Looming Bust for U.S. Solar Industry? http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/09/25/looming-bust-us-solar-industry Examining the Role of Early-Stage Venture Capital Investment in Industry http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/09/08/examining-role-early-stage-venture-capital-investment-energy Rate Decoupling and Economic and Design Considerations http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/rate-decoupling-and-economic-and-design-considerationsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A growing number of U.S. cities have set aggressive clean energy and efficiency targets, but the complexity and cost of energy transition can be daunting. Philadelphia’s Energy Manager offers insights into his city’s new plan to go 100% renewable and cut energy use. --- In September, the City of Philadelphia introduced its roadmap to dramatically reduce carbon emissions and move to 100% renewable energy. Philadelphia’s plan is a step toward fulfilling its commitment to lowering its carbon footprint, and comes as cities across the United States have moved to act on climate change as the federal commitment to address global warming has withered. Adam Agalloco, Philadelphia’s Energy Manager, outlines Philadelphia’s new Municipal Energy Master Plan, the means available to cities that aim to act independently to address climate change, and the costs of doing so. Adam Agalloco is Energy Manager for the City of Philadelphia and lead planner for Philadelphia’s Municipal Energy Master Plan, the city’s roadmap to reduce carbon emissions and adopt renewable energy. Related Content: Tilting at Windmills: The Emerging U.S. Offshore Wind Industry: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/tilting-windmills Comparative Path to Regional Energy Transition: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/pathways Aligning Local Logic with Global Need: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/aligning-local-logic-global-need Pennsylvania’s Gas Decade: Insights into Consumer Pricing Impacts from Shale Gas (2007-2016): http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/pennsylvanias-gas-decadeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The U.S. government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars over the past decade to rebuild coastal cities and towns following hurricanes, yet coastlines remain vulnerable to repeat disaster. Two Penn urban policy experts discuss coastal resiliency and the process by which government allocates recovery funds. -- Federal spending on hurricane disaster relief has risen dramatically since Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans in 2005. Federal agencies have paid out $200 billion dollars for coastal recovery since. And, more recently, Texas governor Greg Abbott projected that recovery from Hurricane Harvey could total $150 billion or more. As spending rises, the need to ensure that coastal towns and cities are more resilient to future, repeat disasters has come to the forefront. And, with much of the nation’s oil refining and chemical industry located in low lying coastal areas, the challenge includes fortifying energy infrastructure, and protecting communities from toxic hazards. Ellen Neises and Billy Fleming, urban policy experts at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Design, discuss the process government uses to select and fund recovery projects, and how coastal areas can be made more resilient. Ellen Neises is Executive Director of Penn Praxis, the center for Applied Research and Planning at the University of Pennsylvania School of Design. Her recent work has focused on developing solutions to rebuild, protect and improve cities hit by Hurricane Sandy. Billy Fleming is Research Coordinator for the Ian L. McHarg Center at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Design, where his research focuses on climate adaptation planning along the U.S. coast. During the Obama Administration, he worked on urban policy development on the White House Domestic Policy Council. Related Content Power Down in Puerto Rico: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/09/28/power-down-puerto-rico Hot Topics on Climate Change: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/hot-topics-climate-change Comparative Pathways to Regional Energy Transition: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/pathways Aligning Global Logic with Local Need: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/aligning-local-logic-global-needSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy weighs in on the fate of the Clean Power Plan, and the EPA itself, under current Administrator Scott Pruitt. --- These are challenging times at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In February of this year former Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, who had sued the EPA more than a dozen times to block environmental and health protections, became the agency’s Administrator. In the months since, he has called for cuts to EPA programs, sought to repeal the Clean Power Plan, and debunk science on climate change. How far will EPA leadership may go in rolling back climate protections? And, more fundamentally, can the EPA operate as an objective steward of the environment and public health in an era when politics, rather than science, increasingly appear to set its agenda? In this episode of Energy Policy Now the Honorable Gina McCarthy, Administrator of the EPA during President Barack Obama’s second term, weighs in on the EPA’s current policy direction, the Trump administration’s attack on climate science, and the practical impact of a Clean Power Plan rollback on carbon reduction. Gina McCarthy served as EPA Administrator from 2013 to 2017 under President Barack Obama. She recorded this podcast during her visit to the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania, to receive the Center’s annual Carnot Prize in celebration of her contributions to environmental policy and to securing a sustainable energy future during her tenure with the EPA. She is currently Menschel Senior Fellow at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Related Content from the Kleinman Center Perry’s Regulatory Curve Ball to Bailout Baseload: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/09/29/perry’s-regulatory-curve-ball-bailout-baseload Reconciling Subsidized Resources in PJM’s Competitive Electricity Markets: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/reconciling-subsidized-resources Energy Storage in PJM: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/energy-storage-pjm Hot Topics on Climate Change: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/hot-topics-climate-change Zero Emissions Credits: An Overview: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/08/31/zero-emissions-credits-overview Shot and Chaser: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2017/08/21/shot-and-chaser The Carbon Tax: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/carbon-taxSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Can tightly regulated coal mining help undo decades worth of environmental damage caused by the coal industry? A Pennsylvania DEP official, and a mining executive, discuss efforts to remediate water and land in the state’s Anthracite coal region. -- Pennsylvania’s economy has long been tied to its coal industry. In the 19th century the state’s pioneering coal companies fueled America’s industrial revolution, and thousands of mining sites opened over the decades that followed. Yet, over a century later, many of Pennsylvania’s coal mines have closed as the resource’s primacy has waned. John Stefanko, Deputy Secretary for the Office of Active and Abandoned Mine Operations at Pennsylvania’s DEP, and Greg Driscoll, Chief Executive of Blaschak Coal Company, look at the environmental damage that remains after mines have been abandoned, and on cooperation between today’s coal industry, and regulators, to clean up some of that damage. The focus is on the Anthracite coal industry of Northeastern Pennsylvania, where the remains of a once large coal industry attempts to find profits, while bearing costs for cleaning up the damage of past decades. John Stefanko is Deputy Secretary for the Office of Active and Abandoned Mine Operations at Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection. Related Content: The Carbon Tax: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/carbon-tax Ending Fossil Fuel Tax Subsidies: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/ending-fossil-fuel-tax-subsidies Comparative Pathways to Regional Energy Transition: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/pathways Revitalizing Coal Communities: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/revitalizing-coal-communitiesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The electric vehicle market seems poised to take off, with high demand for Tesla’s Model 3 and growing attention from big automakers. Yet challenges that stalled EV growth in the past, namely sparse charging infrastructure and high costs, persist. A Wharton School expert looks at the role policymakers can take to support, or sink, the EV renaissance. --- Thanks for joining the Energy Policy Now podcast for our first episode of Season 2. These are exciting times for fans of electric vehicles. Tesla, the Silicon Valley electric car maker, recently introduced its long awaited, relatively affordable Model 3, complete with a huge order backlog. Also recently, the governments of France and the UK announced their goal to phase out the sale of new gas and diesel cars within a generation, opening the door to electrics. Yet in the US the electric vehicle market has looked poised for breakthrough in the past, only to disappoint. In the 1990s General Motors developed a promising electric car, the EV1, that it subsequently sought to erase from common memory. And a century ago, around the time that Henry Ford introduced the Model T, electric cars were common. Yet they ultimately all but disappeared. John Paul MacDuffie, an expert on EV policy at the Wharton School, takes a look at policies that might help electric cars stick this time around, and at innovative government interventions that are already fueling EV markets abroad. John Paul MacDuffie is a professor of Management at the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, and Director of the Program on Vehicle and Mobility Innovation, an international research consortium focused on the global automotive industry. Related Content from the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy: Ending Fossil Fuel Tax Subsidies http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/ending-fossil-fuel-tax-subsidies Stalled: Make Big Trucks More Fuel Efficient http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/stalled-make-big-trucks-more-fuel-efficient Future Energy Demands on the Global Aviation Industry http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/future-energy-demands-global-aviation-energySee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Trump Administration has framed regulation as a drag on the economy and jobs. Yet how much do we really understand about the true benefits and costs of protecting the environment? Two legal and regulatory experts weigh in. --- Early in his administration, President Trump vowed to focus on rolling back regulatory oversight of the energy industry and to lift the regulatory burden on business. Conspicuously absent from two of Trump’s early executive orders targeting environmental oversight, however, was any mention of the benefits that regulation has brought in the areas of environment and health. Regulatory experts Alan Krupnick, Senior Fellow at Resources for the Future, and Cary Coglianese, Director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Program on Regulation, take a look at the benefit-cost equation underlying the development of regulations, and at the actual benefits, and costs, of key policies. Alan Krupnick’s work at Resources for the Future focuses on analyzing energy and environmental issues, in particular the design of pollution and energy strategies. He was a senior economist on the President’s Council of Economic Advisors during the Clinton Administration, and president of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists. Cary Coglianese is the Edward B. Shils Professor of Law, and Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania. He specializes in the study of regulation and regulatory processes and has served as an advisor to the U.S. Department of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency. He is the founder of the Regulatory Review, the flagship publication of the Penn Program on Regulation.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Recent financial bailouts of nuclear reactors in New York and Illinois highlight the conflict between states’ environmental goals and the integrity of electricity markets. As more states weigh subsidies, debate over their market impact and legality expand. --- In 2016 New York and Illinois became the first states to provide direct subsidies to the nuclear power industry, with the goal of keeping economically uncompetitive reactors operating within their borders. The states deemed the nuclear plants, which generate electricity without producing carbon dioxide, as critical to their efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. Yet the bailouts proved contentious in the two states, and the controversy over subsidies is now spreading to a handful of other states weighing similar bailouts. Opponents object to subsidies cost, and argue that they may discourage investment in other new forms of generation, such as natural gas and renewables. And the very legality of the bailouts is now being reviewed in court. In this episode, Christina Simeone, the Kleinman Center’s Director of Regulatory and External Affairs, and David Cherney, an energy industry advisor in the Energy & Utilities Practice at PA Consulting Group in Denver, will examine the roots of nuclear’s financial woes, and the widening debate around nuclear power’s role in decarbonization of the electricity sector. Christina Simeone is Director of Policy and External Affairs at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. She is a past Director of the PennFuture Energy Center for Enterprise and Environment. She also worked for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and was Policy Director at the Alliance for Climate Protection. David Cherney’s work at PA Consulting Group spans public policy analysis, energy infrastructure investment, and utility strategy. He has also worked as an Adjunct Professor in Public Policy at the University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School of International Studies and as a Teaching Fellow at Yale University.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The risk models that policymakers, insurers and communities rely on to predict the nature and frequency of weather-related disasters are becoming less reliable as climate change advances. A Wharton School climate risk expert examines how we might adequately, and equitably, prepare for future disasters. --- In 2012 Hurricane Sandy caused over $70 billion in damage along the U.S. Atlantic coast, leaving communities in desperate financial condition and pushing the National Flood Insurance Program, already financially stretched by a decade of severe weather-related claims, deeper into debt. In addition, coastal cities like Miami and Norfolk, Virginia now experience regular nuisance flooding, demanding huge investments in protective infrastructure to fend off rising seas. How will the U.S. pay for infrastructure needed to minimize the impact of future disasters even as population grows in increasingly flood-prone areas? Howard Kunreuther, Co-Director of the Risk Management and Decision Processes Center at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, discusses the challenge of balancing support for communities at risk for natural disaster with the economic and political challenges to doing so. He also highlights how human psychology can make it hard for people to grasp the likelihood of future disasters, and the role this has played in pushing the national flood insurance program to the brink of insolvency. Howard Kunreuther is the James G. Dinan professor of Decision Sciences and Business and Public Policy at the Wharton School. He is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and a Distinguished Fellow of the Society for Risk Analysis. He has served on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Episode recorded on 5/25/17)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How much should countries spend today to avoid climate change impacts that may be far into the future? A renown economist discusses the emerging discipline of climate economics and explores means of efficiently putting mitigation funds to work. --- How much will global warming cost future generations, and how much should we pay today to avoid the damage a warming climate will cause? Economist Per Krusell, a visiting scholar at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy and member of the Nobel Prize for Economics Committee within the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, discusses the challenge of accurately pricing future damages expected to arise from climate change, and how future costs are reflected through the social cost of carbon. Krusell also highlights how climate economics attempts to guide policymakers toward strategies that make best use of limited climate mitigation funds. Per Krusell is Professor of Economics at Stockholm University. His research focuses broadly on macroeconomics, and the impacts that result from technological change and economic policy. He’s working on a long-term project on the interaction between climate change and the economy.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Carbon Capture and Storage has the potential to dramatically reduce the carbon emissions from the burning of coal. Yet the technology’s boosters need to overcome high costs, and major infrastructure challenges, if they’re to make a dent in emissions. --- Carbon capture and storage offers the promise of slashing carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants, and has been touted by some in the electricity industry as part of a basket of “clean coal” technologies that will dramatically reduce the fuel’s environmental impact and provide a lifeline to the U.S. coal sector. Yet CCS is the only clean coal technology that has yet to prove feasible at a scale, and existing CCS projects are few and far between. Kleinman Center for Energy Policy senior fellow John Quigley takes a look at efforts to reduce the technology’s cost and the relative lack of government support to date for CCS. Quigley also discusses CCS’s environmental promise and whether it can be deployed in time to make a positive climate impact. Guest John Quigley served as secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection from January 2015 to May 2016 and as secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources from 2009 to 2011. Quigley led some of the nation’s most advanced work on the potential of Carbon Capture and Storage under former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell. He is currently a senior fellow at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Fossil fuel tax breaks cost the U.S. $4 billion per year. A former Treasury Department Environment and Energy official looks at whether that’s money well spent. --- The U.S. fossil fuel industry benefits from $4 billion a year in government subsidies, most in the form of tax breaks. But over the past decade debate over the need for subsidies has intensified. The energy industry argues that these subsidies promote the development of domestic energy and support oil and gas jobs. Opponents say there is little justification for subsidizing fossil fuels when government’s focus should be on clean energy and climate. And politicians from both sides of the aisle argue that the government could better use the money spent on subsidies elsewhere. Guest Gilbert Metcalf, Professor of Economics at Tufts University and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, takes a look at the real impact of subsidies on the economics of energy development, renewables and on the environment. Metcalf, who formerly served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment and Energy at the U.S. Department of Treasury, is a visiting scholar at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A senior member of the U.S. State Department’s 2015 Paris climate negotiating team explores the implications of a Trump administration pullback from the agreement. --- The Trump administration has offered conflicting messages around its intention to honor U.S. commitments under the 2015 Paris Climate Accord. Still in the early days of his presidency, President Trump has launched a range of efforts to roll back domestic climate protections, most notably his recent executive order to withdraw support for the Clean Power Plan, and his promise to weaken automotive fuel economy standards. Both are essential to the U.S. meeting its Paris climate goals. Yet some voices in the administration, and within the energy industry, have urged the President to “maintain a seat at the table” of global climate dialogue. Andrew Light, former member of the U.S. State Department’s Paris climate negotiating team, explores the outlook for constructive U.S. participation in the effort to combat climate change and the fate of a global, coordinated climate effort. Andrew Light is a Distinguished Senior Fellow in the Global Climate Program at the World Resources Institute and Director of the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy at George Mason University. From 2013 to 2016 he worked for the U.S. State Department, where he was Chair of the Interagency Climate Working Group on UN Sustainable Development Goals, and he served on the senior strategy team for UN Climate Negotiations. Earlier, he was Director of International Climate Policy at the Center for American Progress.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Trump administration is leveraging an array of legal and political tools to roll back environmental protections. A U. Penn environmental law expert takes a look a Trump’s strategy, pitfalls that await, and the potential for protections to endure. -- The Trump administration is doing its best to fulfill its campaign promise to reduce environmental protections related to the energy industry and wider economy. Rollback efforts are taking place through a variety of means, including the issuance of an executive order that notably targets the Clean Power Plan, the defunding of government agencies with environmental oversight, and the use of an obscure rule that allows Congress to overturn standards issued in the final months the Obama administration. Yet the success of rollbacks isn’t assured. In some cases environmental protections exist due to legal requirement, and where rollbacks create a regulatory vacuum, new rules must take their place. University of Pennsylvania law professor Cary Coglianese explores the administration’s options to pare environmental rules and the challenges each approach is likely to face. Coglianese also takes a look at possible routes to defend protections. Cary Coglianese is professor of law and political science at the University of Pennsylvania and Director of the Penn Program on Regulation. He specializes in the study of regulation and regulatory processes and has served as an advisor to the U.S. Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency. He is the founder of The Regulatory Review, the flagship publication of the Penn Program on Regulation.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Distributed energy technologies like rooftop solar are eating away at electric utilities’ business. Can utilities adapt, and at what cost to consumers? -- Rooftop solar attracts homeowners with the promise of electricity savings and environmental benefits. Yet every kilowatt hour of electricity generated at home translates into an equivalent amount of electricity no longer sold by a traditional electric utility. As utilities face the prospect of flat and even declining electricity revenue, concerns over their future economic health, and the reliability of the electric power supply we’ve long taken for granted, have been called increasingly into question. Sonny Popowsky, former Consumer Advocate for Pennsylvania and advisory board member of the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy explores how utilities might adapt to the challenge of distributed energy and energy efficiency, and the costs their survival could bring to ratepayers. Sonny Popowsky served as the Consumer Advocate of Pennsylvania from 1990 to 2012. He served as the President of the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA) from 1996 to 1998 and was previously Chairman of the NASUCA Electric Committee. Mr. Popowsky served on the Board of Trustees of the NorthAmerican Electric Reliability Council (NERC) from 1997 to 2001 and the NERC Stakeholders Committee from2001 to 2006. In 2010, Mr. Popowsky was appointed to the Department of Energy’s Electricity Advisory Committee and was named Vice Chair of that Committee in 2012. Mr. Popowsky also currently serves on the Advisory Council of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), the Board of Directors of the Energy Coordinating Agency of Philadelphia, the Executive Council of the Pennsylvania AARP, and as a pro bono member of the Certification Decision Committee of the Center for Sustainable Shale Development.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Carbon taxation and carbon cap and trade have been implemented with varied success as greenhouse gas reduction strategies in recent years. Carbon taxes have gone into effect, seemingly counterintuitively, where the energy industry looms large. And cap and trade programs have operated broadly across Europe, and regionally in parts of the U.S. Energy Policy Now guest Jim Hines, Professor of economics and law at the University of Michigan, provides insight into the workings of cap and trade and carbon taxation, and explains the unique set of factors that may make one policy more politically acceptable than the other. Jim Hines is a professor of law and economics at the University of Michigan, and an editorial advisor to the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. His research is focused on various aspects of taxation. He is a research associate with the National Bureau of Economic Research, and research director of the International Tax Policy Forum.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In 2016 the first shipment of U.S. liquefied natural gas left by tanker from a terminal on the Gulf coast. In the year since, U.S. LNG has made its way to customers around the globe, increasing competition in the gas market and threatening to loosen the grip of some suppliers on captive markets. Guest Anna Mikulska, Senior Fellow at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, talks about the globalization of the natural gas market, the competitiveness of U.S. exports and their implications for relationships abroad. Dr. Anna Mikulska is a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Kleinman Center for Energy Policy and nonresident scholar in energy studies at the Baker Institute’s Center for Energy Studies at Rice University. Her research interests center around European energy markets and energy policy. She has presented papers at numerous national and international conferences and co-authored articles in the European Journal of Political Research and the Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, as well as a chapter in the “Introduction to American Government” textbook. Mikulska has served as a reviewer for numerous scholarly journals and was on the editorial board of the law review at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poland.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

n January 2017 Canada’s oil-rich province of Alberta took the unprecedented step of instituting a carbon tax. Combined with a cap on greenhouse emissions from the Oil Sands, the bulk of the province’s economy is now party to one of the most encompassing efforts to date in North America to address global warming. Alberta’s senior diplomatic representative to the United States, Gitane De Silva, talks about the province’s climate goals and the process by which Albertan industry, environmentalists and government found common ground to get the tax passed. Gitane De Silva is Alberta’s Senior Representative to the United States. Prior to her current appointment, she served as Deputy Minister of Alberta International and Intergovernmental Relations. Before joining the Alberta Civil Service, Ms. De Silva was Consul General of Canada in Chicago.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New energy storage technologies are increasingly connecting to the electric grid, but it’s not clear that current rules in electricity markets are designed to help storage and new distributed energy resources (DER) participate as fully as other generation. The federal government’s electricity market regulator, FERC, has issued a notice with proposed rules that could create new opportunities for deployment and investment but also raise questions for stakeholders to address.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The airline industry accounts for two percent of global carbon emissions, and emissions are likely to increase as the popularity of air travel rises. Policymakers are increasingly working with airlines to find ways to limit emissions growth. But the diverse, global industry is difficult to regulate, and competitiveness issues abound. Megan Ryerson, professor of transportation at the University of Pennsylvania and an expert in environmental impacts of the air transportation system, provides insights into the airline industry’s environmental challenges and possible strategies to address its greenhouse emissions. Dr. Megan S. Ryerson is an Assistant Professor of City and Regional Planning and Electrical and Systems Engineering in the area of Transportation at the University of Pennsylvania. Her research focuses on the tradeoff between economic development and environmental impacts presented by the air transportation system and the design of resilient multimodal transportation system networks. She received her Ph.D. in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University of California, Berkeley. Learn more: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/energy-policy-nowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In recent years cyber attacks have targeted sensitive data of multinational oil companies, downed one country’s power grid and sabotaged another’s nuclear weapons program. Despite growing risks to domestic infrastructure, U.S. energy and electricity sectors remain ill-prepared to defend themselves against cyber threats. Bill Hederman, former senior advisor to the U.S. secretary of energy and a senior fellow at the Kleinman Center, discusses cybersecurity and the roles of industry and government in confronting security challenges. Guest Bill Hederman most recently served as senior advisor to U.S. Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, providing leadership on USDOE missions to Ukraine, the Baltics, and Germany. He is the chief architect behind the analytic framework developed for DOE's groundbreaking Quadrennial Energy Review. During the Enron and California crises, Hederman joined FERC and formed the Office of Market Oversight and Investigations, which has been credited with playing a major role in the restoration of confidence in electricity and natural gas regulatory oversight. Learn more: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/energy-policy-nowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Explosive development of shale resources has breathed new economic life into communities across the United States, current low gas prices notwithstanding. But how might individual states balance fossil energy-driven economic development with environmental protection? Former Pennsylvania DEP Secretary and coal-town Mayor John Quigley discusses his state’s political juggling of energy and environmental concerns, and the prospects for environmental progress should policymakers roll back fossil fuel regulations. Guest John Quigley served as secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection from January 2015 to May 2016 and as secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources from 2009 to 2011. He is the first and only person in Pennsylvania history to serve as Secretary of both of the state's natural resource agencies. Quigley also served as a two-term mayor of Hazleton, PA. He is currently a senior fellow at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy. Learn more: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/energy-policy-nowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Twenty years ago Pennsylvania opened its electricity sector to competition and the promise of cheaper and more reliable service. Two decades later, competitive markets have mostly delivered, but with notable caveats. Former Pennsylvania Secretary of Policy and Planning and DEP Head John Hangar, and the Kleinman Center Policy Director Christina Simeone examine the benefits and shortcomings of two decades of wholesale and retail electric competition. Their findings appear in their recently published report, “A Case Study of Electricity Competition Results in Pennsylvania”, which is available for download at http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/electricity-competition . Guest John Hangar has held four public offices and was a Democratic candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania. He works in the private sector as a legal services attorney and is the founder of an environmental non-profit organization. Christina Simeone is the director of policy and external affairs at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. Learn more: http://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/energy-policy-nowSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.