This post was originally published on Legal Planet. Reprinted with permission.
The COVID pandemic has provided a vivid picture of what happens when ill-prepared governments are suddenly hit with huge responsibilities. Underfunded state and local public health agencies were overwhelmed, while governors and local officials found themselves struggling to obtain and distribute vital supplies, from respirators to vaccines. Efforts to accelerate the transition away from carbon, such as a green stimulus, may run into similar problems if we neglect the agencies that will have to implement policies.
People tend to think of the energy transition in terms of wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, and charging stations for electric vehicles. That can presumably be accomplished through mandates to utilities or financial incentives. The trouble is that all of these changes have to function in connection with a power system that wasn’t built to accommodate them. That requires careful planning to ensure that the system remains robust and reliable. Energy regulators in California, New York, Texas, and some other states are in a good position to deal with those problems, though even those states will have to ramp up their efforts as the federal government pushes the transition faster.
But the energy transition has to reach beyond the vanguard states. Energy regulators in many other states have very little experience in dealing with such rapid changes in the grid. The first-movers on climate change have been affluent states whose agencies tend to be well funded. Less affluent states may struggle to fund the needed expansion in agency expertise. If they don’t get help, they’ll be forced to rely on their utilities for information and planning, which is far from ideal.
The problem isn’t just limited to state governments. A significant amount of the country is served by regional cooperatives or publicly owned utilities rather than the private sector, and these power providers may also find themselves short of the expertise they need. Universities across the country might be funded to help provide training but also to provide state-specific research to assist local institutions. They will need funding to expand their focus on clean energy, in an era when electrical engineers typically work on microchips, not power grids.
The federal government ought to be thinking about grant programs to help these various institutions build capacity. Other capacity-building efforts might include training programs and financing information exchanges between states.
As the Biden administration looks to rev-up clean energy, this funding need should not be forgotten. The amount of money is minor compared with current government spending on clean energy, let alone what we might see from a green recovery bill. Without this funding, however, there’s a risk that lack of institutional capacity might become a serious bottleneck to decarbonizing the economy.
Showing 2,880 results
Daniel Farber | March 8, 2021
The COVID pandemic has provided a vivid picture of what happens when ill-prepared governments are suddenly hit with huge responsibilities. Underfunded state and local public health agencies were overwhelmed, while governors and local officials found themselves struggling to obtain and distribute vital supplies, from respirators to vaccines. Efforts to accelerate the transition away from carbon, such as a green stimulus, may run into similar problems if we neglect the agencies that will have to implement policies.
Hannah Wiseman, Maggie Dewane | March 5, 2021
To commemorate Women’s History Month, we’re interviewing women at the Center for Progressive Reform about how they’re building a more just America.
Sidney A. Shapiro | March 3, 2021
Amid the Sturm und Drang (storm and stress) of politics these days, one fact stands out — a large majority of Americans want more regulatory protection in a wide variety of areas, according to a recent poll of likely voters. The results are consistent with previous polls that indicate that Americans understand the importance of government regulation in protecting them from financial and health risks beyond their control. They also indicate majority support for efforts by the Biden administration to renew government regulation — as well as a stark repudiation of former President Trump’s extreme anti-regulatory agenda.
Daniel Farber | March 2, 2021
"The social cost of carbon" isn't exactly a household phrase. It's an estimate of the harm caused by emitting a ton of carbon dioxide over the many decades it remains in the atmosphere. That's an important factor in calculating the costs and benefits of climate regulations. For an arcane concept, it has certainly caused a lot of controversy. The Obama administration came up with a set of estimates, which Trump then slashed by 90 percent. In an early executive order, Biden created a task force to revisit the issue. Last week, the task force issued its first report. It's an impressive effort given that Biden is barely a month into his presidency. The document provides a clear overview of the ways in which climate science and climate economics have advanced since the Obama estimates and makes the case for rejecting the Trump administration's revisions. At least one federal court has already rejected those revisions, as well.
Katlyn Schmitt | March 1, 2021
Businesses that violate environmental laws and permits damage our air, land, and water, sometimes irreparably. Yet too often, these polluters aren't held accountable for harming the environment and public health. In Maryland, state officials don't respond to all violations, and, when they do, they aren't always successful. Even when they are successful, fines and other penalties don't necessarily result in behavior change. As a result, Maryland polluters are largely off the hook for the "externalities" of doing business.
Daniel Farber | February 26, 2021
In the wake of the Texas blackouts, we're seeing a number of familiar moves to deflect blame by the usual suspects -- politicians, regulators, and CEOs. These evasive tactics all begin with a core truth: Eliminating all risk is impossible and would be too expensive even if it weren't. But then they spin that truth in various ways. The result is to obscure responsibility for the disaster and the steps that should be taken going forward.
Allison Stevens | February 25, 2021
Seven years ago, public officials in cash-strapped Flint, Michigan, cut city costs by tapping the Flint River as a source of public drinking water. So began the most egregious example of environmental injustice in recent U.S. history, according to Paul Mohai, a founder of the movement for environmental justice and a professor at the University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability.
Robert Verchick | February 24, 2021
Since I began serving on Louisiana’s Climate Initiatives Task Force, charged with finding a way to zero out net greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050, there is one question I get from people more than any other: "C'mon, are you serious?" It's not that Louisianans don't see the need. Sea-level rise could soon swallow our coast, and hurricanes souped up by climate change are now the new normal. The problem is how we see ourselves. Louisiana, I'm reminded, is an oil-and-gas state. Whatever were we thinking? My quick response is Louisiana is really an energy state, with more sun and offshore wind than most of our peers.
Richard E. Levy, Robert L. Glicksman | February 23, 2021
Since taking office, President Biden has pursued an active agenda to address many urgent matters that require his prompt attention. We hope one important initiative does not get lost in transition: restoring the norms of good governance.