In this edition:
- An analysis of the funding methods used to support public parks
- Expert commentary on the effects of EPA’s emissions regulations on coal plants
State Park Funding Options
Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy unveiled his state budget last month, which includes a “$2 million cut in the annual state parks budget.” The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, which is responsible for overseeing 255,000 acres of state land, would need to “cobbl[e] together state park funding from an array of sources” rather than rely exclusively on the state’s general fund.
According to research by RFF’s Margaret Walls, “It is time to rethink the approach to financing parks and work toward a more sustainable and efficient long-term funding system.” She notes that using an enterprise fund model, where “revenues earned in the parks would stay in the parks,” might provide better incentives for park management and help smooth the ups and downs in park funding.
Emissions Regulations Challenged
A DC federal appeals court heard arguments last week for one of the first legal challenges to the Obama administration’s proposed Clean Power Plan. The case is being led by Murray Energy Corporation, which believes that EPA’s climate regulations “would harm its business by dramatically reducing the use of coal for power generation.”
RFF’s Dallas Burtraw notes that “EPA’s goal [for coal-fired power plants] is technically plausible” and while costs could be modest when making one to two percent heat rate improvements, “the cost of a six percent improvement … could be significant.” Burtraw and Anthony Licata of Licata Energy discuss performance improvements for coal power plants as part of RFF’s Expert Forum on EPA’s Clean Power Plan.
