Analysis

All Analysis

Filter by

Filtering By:

1 - 10 of 10 results

Experts React: Energy Policy in the Reconciliation Debate

The House of Representatives released its initial budget reconciliation bill, significantly changing the energy policy landscape in the United States. In this Experts React, our team examines the most momentous, surprising, and nuanced aspects of the proposed legislation.

Commentary by Joseph Majkut, Clayton Seigle, Kyle Danish, Leslie Abrahams, Jane Nakano, Arushi Sharma Frank, and Mathias Zacarias — May 15, 2025

U.S. LNG Exports: DOE and FERC Roles and Boundaries

It will be challenging for the DOE to address climate, price, and environmental justice concerns over LNG exports in its “public interest” findings due to the constraints of DOE and FERC statutory and regulatory authority.  

Commentary by Kevin Book, Ben Cahill, Michael Catanzaro, and Kyle Danish — March 15, 2024

U.S. Supreme Court Constrains EPA’s Climate Authorities

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case West Virginia v. EPA, will have a ripple effect on the broader federal approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But options remain for the EPA to cut emissions from the power sector.

Critical Questions by Kyle Danish and Joseph Majkut — July 12, 2022

Climate Policy Risk in the U.S. Electric Power Sector

Most stakeholders are looking for no-regret strategies to mitigate potential risks while solving other important issues they face. But whether and how far to “get ahead” of policy is a more complicated strategic decision.

Report by Kyle Danish and Sarah Ladislaw — October 26, 2018

The Future of the Clean Power Plan and Trump Administration Climate Policy

Late last week, officials from the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made it clear that they are working on a proposed rule that would not only repeal the Clean Power Plan (CPP) but also solicit public comment on possible replacements. Following quickly after this announcement, high-level White House officials caused and then tamped down a flurry of speculation about a potential route for the administration to stay in the Paris Climate Agreement rather than pull out as previously stated. Though not necessarily coordinated, these two events suggest that the Trump administration’s positions on climate policy remain a moving target; the positions could be more malleable than it first appeared.

Commentary by Sarah Ladislaw, Kyle Danish, and John Larsen — September 21, 2017

Playing the Long Game on Energy: Avoiding Pendulum Politics and Regulatory Risk

Last week, the Donald Trump administration announced its decision to leave the Paris Agreement. The decision was treated by many government and corporate leaders around the world as an immediate and abrupt abandoning of the global climate effort. In reality, the process for withdrawing from the agreement is lengthy, and the concrete steps for meeting the U.S. commitment under the agreement were already being targeted for reconsideration through the deregulatory agenda launched during the first 100 days.

Commentary by Kyle Danish and Sarah Ladislaw — June 7, 2017