Exporting LNG
Recently, several congressional committees have held hearings to review the benefits and implications of expediting exports of liquid natural gas (LNG). While industry has supported such proposals, environmental groups remain concerned about how increased gas use will contribute to more greenhouse gas emissions (especially methane).“Greenhouse gas emissions need to come down. But fighting exports of gas and oil is way down the list of actions that will be effective and economically sensible,” says RFF’s Alan Krupnick. In a recent blog post, he writes: “To the extent our exports make gas prices in Europe and Asia lower, that may enable more fuel substitution away from coal, lowering greenhouse gas emissions.” Read more commentary on LNG exports from RFF experts here, here, and here.
Local Impacts of Shale Gas
While discussions about natural gas exports have taken the national (and international) stage, local communities around the country continue to feel the direct effects (both positive and negative) of shale gas development. Some regions are experiencing economic booms, while others are eyeing potential risks. On April 10, RFF is hosting a seminar to illuminate the pros and cons of such impacts, including research on the boom-and-bust cycles, how impact fees are being used in local economies, effects on residential property values, and observed changes in truck traffic and accidents in local communities (infographic). Register for the seminar or watch on the web at www.rff.org/live.
Returning Carbon Tax Revenue
British Columbia’s carbon tax, touted as “the most significant carbon tax in the Western Hemisphere,” seems to be working—reducing gasoline use and causing consumers to change their habits. It was also designed to be “revenue neutral,” with the collected funds being returned to citizens in the form of tax breaks. (Note research at RFF, cited in the article, says a carbon tax in the United States could be both efficient and cost-effective.)
In a recent interview with Resources magazine, RFF’s Dallas Burtraw says, “Introducing a tax on dirty goods, such as carbon dioxide, and using the revenue to offset preexisting taxes on things that we want to see—such as more labor and more capital investment—can be good for the economy.” He explains that this world view reflects the perspective that “the atmosphere is the common property of individuals even though government plays a role in how to manage it.” Read the full interview or listen to the podcast: Putting a Price on Carbon: Who Gets the Revenue?
