Energy Tomorrow Blog
The Ozone Regulatory Revolving Door
ozone standards epa regulation air quality economic impacts job losses
Mark Green
Posted February 3, 2015
Politico reports (subscription required) that the White House Office of Management and Budget on Friday finished review of EPA’s final rule to set state implementation plan requirements for the agency’s 2008 ozone standards.
Here’s the significance of that piece of wonky news: Even before EPA has finished telling the states how to implement the 2008 ozone standards, the agency already is well into setting new, potentially stricter standards. Regulation for regulation sake? It would be hard to find a better illustration.
Ozone Science, Facts Should Guide Public Debate
ozone standards air quality economic impacts job losses epa regulation policy
Mark Green
Posted January 29, 2015
With EPA opening public hearings (subscription required) on its proposed new ground-level ozone standards, it’s important that we not let some key facts get lost in the wave of comments and anecdotes that results when there’s an open microphone available.
At issue is EPA’s plan to make more restrictive the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone, from the current 75 parts per billion (ppb) to between 65 and 70 ppb. The agency is collecting input until mid-March before finalizing the rule this fall.
We’ve made the case before that the existing standards are working, that our air is getting cleaner and will continue to do so with the current rule. In short, there’s no good reason to make the standards more stringent. That’s what the science shows, as experts detailed at EPA’s hearing in Washington, D.C. (here and here). Indeed, EPA’s own data shows that ozone levels have fallen 33 percent since 1980, including 18 percent since 2000.
Energy Tax Hikes, Impacts and the Great White Whale
intangible drilling costs tax increases lifo job losses energy production
Mark Green
Posted November 22, 2013
Today we offer three charts – all associated with the latest congressional bid to raise revenue for the federal government by hiking taxes on oil and natural gas companies.
U.S. Sen. Max Baucus has proposed delaying industry’s ability to write off intangible drilling costs (IDCs) and doing away with the “last-in, last-out” accounting method (LIFO) used by a number of energy companies. More on LIFO below. Here are three charts from Wood Mackenzie’s recent study on the impacts of delaying IDC deductions.