Beacon Hill Institute Study on Clean Power Plan
Share the facts on Twitter:
- Fact check: Reports by @BHIToday exclude clean energy from @EPA’s #CleanPowerPlan Tweet this
A series of so-called “cost-benefit” analyses from the Beacon Hill Institute (BHI) artificially inflates the costs of the Clean Power Plan nationally and in a number of states, while failing to include most of the benefits projected by the EPA in its regulatory impact analysis.
How? BHI wrongly assumes that states will not choose to use renewable energy and energy efficiency to cost effectively meet their targets for reducing carbon pollution under the EPA’s proposal. In reality, many states already choose to require utilities to meet targets for increasing renewable energy and improving energy efficiency, policies that will count towards compliance. By excluding energy efficiency from its analysis, BHI is simply ignoring savings on electricity bills projected by the EPA, and those delivered by actual energy efficiency programs in the real world.
BHI’s “analysis” also excludes billions of dollars in annual climate and health benefits calculated by the EPA.
Funding for the reports comes from the Employment Policy Institute, a special interest group run by controversial public relations consultant Rick Berman. Berman is known for marketing his services to fossil fuel executives by boasting about engaging in over-the-top attacks designed to exploit emotions like fear and anger, such as his “EPA Facts” ad campaign comparing the EPA to terrorists and anarchists for its efforts to limit power plant emissions.