Lincoln L. Davies

Energy, Consumption, and the Amorality of Energy Law

As the world turns its attention to Paris this December, all eyes will be on international decisionmakers, including those from the United States, to see if meaningful progress on climate change can finally be made. Climate change, of course, is the great environmental challenge of our time, a challenge that is irrevocably bound up with energy production and consumption. This “super wicked” problem long has been seen as a political, economic, ecological, and social one. However, as Pope Francis’ encyclical makes clear, it is a moral problem as well.

Regulatory Promotion of Emergent CCS Technology

Despite the growing inevitability of climate change and the attendant need for mitigation strategies, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) has yet to gain much traction in the United States. Recent regulatory proposals by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), limited in scope to new-build power plants, represent the only significant policy initiative intended to mandate diffusion of CCS technology. Phase I of this Project assessed barriers to CCS deployment as prioritized by the CCS community. That research concluded that there were four primary barriers: (1) cost, (2) lack of a carbon price, (3) liability, and (4) lack of a comprehensive regulatory regime. Phase II of this Project, as presented in this Report, assesses potential regulatory models for CCS and examines where those models address the hurdles to diffusing CCS technology identified in Phase I. It concludes (1) that a CCS-specific but flexible standard, such as a technology performance standard or a very particular type of market-based regulation, likely will promote CCS diffusion, and (2) that these policies cannot work alone, but rather, should be combined with other measures, such as liability limits and a comprehensive CCS regulatory regime.

Carbon Capture and Sequestration: A Regulatory Gap Assessment

Though a potentially significant climate change mitigation strategy, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) remains mired in demonstration and development rather than proceeding to full-scale commercialization. Prior studies have suggested numerous reasons for this stagnation. This Report seeks to empirically assess those claims. Using an anonymous opinion survey completed by over 200 individuals involved in CCS, it concludes that there are four primary barriers to CCS commercialization: (1) cost, (2) lack of a carbon price, (3) liability risks, and (4) lack of a comprehensive regulatory regime. These results largely confirm previous work. They also, however, expose a key barrier that prior studies have overlooked: the need for comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, CCS regulation. The survey data clearly show that the CCS community sees this as one of the most needed incentives for CCS deployment. The community also has a relatively clear idea of what that regulation should entail: a cooperative federalism approach that directly addresses liability concerns and that generally does not upset traditional lines of federal-state authority.