July 18, 2019
Environmental Engineering Professor Charles Driscoll joined researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston University School of Public Health, and Resources for the Future evaluated the cost-benefit analysis for the U.S EPA’s Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, known as a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), to determine whether it incorporates the best available information and the conclusions are fully supported. The results are summarized in their new working paper, Carbon Standards Re-Examined: An Analysis of Potential Emissions Outcomes for the Affordable Clean Energy Rule and the Clean Power Plan.
On June 19, 2019, the EPA repealed the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) and finalized the ACE rule. The intent of the ACE rule is to establish the Best System of Emission Reduction for carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants, a requirement under the Clean Air Act. The research team evaluated the RIA by undertaking new energy modeling and conducting side-by-side comparisons of EPA’s findings and assumptions with those of other scenarios.
The results from this new analysis call into question the assumptions and conclusions in EPA’s cost-benefit analysis. They demonstrate that the ACE rule does little to address climate change and is likely to have even greater adverse air quality and health effects in some states than EPA has projected.
You can read their report here.