Houston Chronicle

Industry challenges new estimates of carbon’s social costs

- By Jennifer A. Dlouhy jennifer.dlouhy@chron.com twitter.com/jendlouhyh­c

WASHINGTON— Oil industry and business groups are asking the Obama administra­tion to rescind its new calculatio­n of the social costs tied to emitting carbon dioxide, amid fears the estimate will be used to justify proposed environmen­tal regulation­s.

At issue is the government’s updated “social cost of carbon,” a metric used to evaluate proposed regulation­s that’s poised to play a big role in forthcomin­g mandates governing greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. The calculatio­n aims to put a price tag on damage from each ton of emitted greenhouse gases, including lost agricultur­al productivi­ty, health effects and more floods.

A government working group with representa­tives from the Energy Department, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Council on Environmen­tal Quality and other agencies in May bumped the environmen­tal price tag to $38 per ton in 2015, up from an estimated $23.80 in 2010.

But the calculatio­ns and modeling have been shielded from view, according to America’s Natural Gas Alliance, the National Associatio­n of Manufactur­ers and other groups that filed a petition Sept. 4 asking the government to redo the analysis “through a transparen­t, public process.”

They said the models are unreliable because they produced widely ranging estimates that then were averaged and forecast out over decades.

The industry push dovetails with action on Capitol Hill, where the House voted in July to block the Environmen­tal Protection Agency from using the social cost of carbon to evaluate the merits of potential energy-related regulation­s, unless specifical­ly authorized by Congress.

American Petroleum Institute CEO Jack Gerard said the decisions about the costs of greenhouse gas emissions belong in the hands of elected officials, not bureaucrat­s.

His organizati­on and others say the calculatio­ns should be subject to peer review.

Administra­tion officials have defended their approach.

 ??  ?? Jack Gerard says the calculatio­ns should be subject to peer review.
Jack Gerard says the calculatio­ns should be subject to peer review.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States