George David Banks

Published in The Hill

Most observers would assume that the biggest impediment to creating a comfort zone for the GOP on energy and climate policy would be the climate skeptic or denier, as many far left environmentalists would say. Surprisingly, this isn’t the case.

The Obama administration’s climate change agenda is highly controversial. Current greenhouse regulations impacting existing and new power plants will certainly drive up energy costs, distort electricity markets, and harm economic growth and job creation in the United States. EPA’s SNAP program, however, is supported by the regulated industry and carries substantial benefits for U.S. industry by allowing it to leverage its current competitive advantage in the HFC replacement market.

While the credit has received broad bipartisan support in the past, it has come under increased scrutiny for distorting electricity markets and undermining the competitiveness of baseload power generation, including nuclear reactors. EPA’s recent Clean Power Plan (CPP) – which forces states to cut an average of 32 percent of their carbon emissions before 2030 — also calls into question the continued need for the tax credit because it provides substantial subsidies to wind and locks in wind carve-outs under state renewable portfolio standards.

According to several independent studies and analyses, a large gap exists in the U.S. climate pledge to the United Nations. Simply put, the greenhouse...

INTRODUCTION Chinese policymakers are grappling with the country’s growing dependence on oil imports. Self-sufficient in crude as recently as the early 1990s, China is expected...

On September 11 of this year, the Obama administration announced that it would take immediate measures to end funding of the only U.S. uranium...

Antiquated federal laws that severely limit U.S. energy exports undermine long-term U.S. foreign policy interests by threatening the international free trade regime, obstructing development...

Last year’s U.S.-China Announcement on Climate Change is rich in what it says and does not say. Interestingly, both sides of the U.S. climate policy debate have framed the Announcement as something that it is not – an agreement with commitments related to emissions cuts and limitations.

The role of the federal government in the international financing of coal plants has become controversial in recent years. Some policymakers as well as environmental activists oppose the use of any public funds for any overseas coal plant, including highly-efficient units, while some fiscal conservatives want an end to all government financing of exports and projects.