Blog

Since 1981, cost-benefit analysis has been at the core of the rulemaking process. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), the so-called “regulatory czar” in the White House, must approve every significant regulation based on a review of its cost-benefit analysis. But cost-benefit analysis has had a major blind spot. It embodies techniques for analyzing possible harmful outcomes when the probability of those outcomes can be quantified with reasonable confidence. When those probabilities cannot be quantified (“deep uncertainty”), the analytic path is more difficult. This issue is especially important in the context of climate change, given the potential for tipping points to produce disastrous outcomes.

The founding of the United States was far from perfect, reflecting the deep flaws and exploitative practices of the founders themselves. But there was one thing they got right: They created a government charged, in part, with protecting the general welfare. That includes you, me, the American people writ large, and our environment. We at […]

At the end of August, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a draft rule to better protect people who live near industrial facilities with hazardous chemicals on site. The rule would strengthen EPA’s Risk Management Program (RMP), which regulates more than 12,000 facilities in the United States that store, use, and distribute significant amounts of dangerous chemicals.

States have played a critical role in U.S. climate policy. The federal government is now supporting that role with federal funding for states. In the meantime, a number of states have moved a step further in plans to phase out gas and diesel vehicles. Two key states have ramped up their plans for carbon neutrality, while offshore wind made a big step forward in the Midwest.

The Center for Progressive Reform recently launched the Campaign for Energy Justice to ensure that North Carolina’s transition to a clean energy economy serves all North Carolinians regardless of wealth or background. The campaign puts equity at the center of the state’s transition to clean sources of energy like wind and solar power. Unfortunately, a plan submitted to the North Carolina Utility Commission (NCUC) by Duke Energy to reduce carbon emissions fails to take equity into account.

In the spring of 2022, Duke Energy submitted a Carbon Plan to help North Carolina achieve goals laid out in recently enacted laws to curb climate change. The plan ostensibly aims to achieve the state's climate goals to curb carbon emissions. Under this plan, however, low-wealth North Carolinians, who are disproportionately people of color, risk losing access to reliable, affordable electricity.

From family farmers to biofuel investors, over 900 people and advocacy groups submitted comments on California’s draft plan for achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. In their comments, environmental advocates and justice groups expressed three major concerns with the state’s draft “scoping” plan. First, the plan fails to recognize the urgency of transitioning to a clean energy economy. Second, it relies too heavily on unproven technology. And third, it fails to specify concrete implementation measures.

Our hemisphere’s shared natural heritage is threatened. The Convention on Nature Protection and Wild Life Preservation is a low-risk, high-reward pathway for the Biden administration to strengthen our strategic relationships in the hemisphere.

Climate change poses a serious threat to occupational health and safety. Workers — especially low-income workers and those who work outdoors — are particularly vulnerable to rising temperatures and increasingly frequent extreme weather and other climate-related disasters.