Search

Begin New Search Topic International Political Economy Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Special Report Publishing Institution Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University

1. Emissions, Energy, and Economic Implications of the Curbelo Carbon Tax Proposal

Author:
Noah Kaufman
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
In July 2018 Representative Carlos Curbelo proposed legislation that would put a price on US carbon dioxide emissions (“Curbelo proposal”). A carbon price is widely viewed as a necessary part of a cost-effective national strategy to address the risks of climate change. This proposal is especially notable because Republicans, who currently control the US Senate, House of Representatives, and presidency, have not proposed national carbon pricing legislation in nearly a decade.
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Political Economy, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Asian LNG Trading Hubs: Myth or Reality

Author:
Mike Fulwood
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
Almost every LNG conference has on its agenda nowadays the topic of Asian LNG trading hubs. Governments, regulatory authorities, academics, and market participants are all presenting on how a hub might be developed in Asia. There have also been a number of reports published in the last few years on the development of hubs in Asia.
Topic:
International Political Economy and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Making Sense of the Trump Administration's Fuel Economy Standard Rollback

Author:
Jason Bordoff, Akos Losz, and Aaron Linn
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
On April 2, 2018, the EPA announced that planned fuel economy increases for cars and light trucks in model years 2022–2025 are too stringent and should be revised.[2] The EPA thus initiated a process to set new standards for 2022–2025, in partnership with the NHTSA. The standards were a central part of the Obama administration’s efforts to reduce US greenhouse gas emissions. The move to weaken the standards has been sharply criticized by many environmental groups, policymakers, and others. Supporters of the current standards argue that the standards would substantially reduce emissions at a modest cost. But the standards have been highly controversial, and the move has also received a great deal of praise from other groups. Supporters of weakening the standards—including those in the Trump administration—argue that the current standards would be excessively costly to consumers and automakers, while providing little or no benefit to the public. Many analyses have proclaimed that this announcement would have profound effects on consumers, oil consumption, oil imports, and greenhouse gas emissions. One think tank, for example, told the Financial Times that US oil consumption, which was nearly 20 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2017, would be 1.5 million bpd higher in 2025 if the 2022–2025 fuel economy standards were rolled back
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Political Economy, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus