Search

This paper presents a linear programming (LP) methodology for estimating the cost of reducing a state's coal-fired power plant carbon dioxide emissions by cofiring switchgrass and coal. LP modeling allows interplay between regionally specific switchgrass production forecasts, coal plant locations, and individual coal plant historic performance data to determine an allocation of switchgrass minimizing cost or maximizing carbon reduction. The LP methodology is applied to two states, Pennsylvania (PA) and Iowa (IA), and results are presented with a discussion of modeling assumptions, techniques, and carbon mitigation policy implications. The LP methodology estimates that, in PA, 4.9 million tons of CO2/year could be mitigated at an average cost of less than $34/ton of CO2 and that, in IA, 7 million tons of CO2/year could be mitigated at an average Cost of Mitigation of $27/ton of CO2. Because the factors determining the cofiring costs vary so much between the two states, results suggest that cofiring costs will also vary considerably between different U.S. regions. A national level analysis could suggest a lowest-cost cofiring region. This paper presents techniques and assumptions that can simplify biomass energy policy analysis with little effect on analysis conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

State officials responsible for the regulation of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) operations used in the production of oil and gas resources will inevitably confront a key policy issue; that is, to what extent can statewide regulations be developed without reducing land use autonomy typically exercised by local officials? Most state regulators have historically recognized the economic importance of industry jobs and favor the adoption of uniform regulatory requirements even if these rules preempt local policymaking authority. Conversely, many local officials seek to preserve land use autonomy to provide a greater measure of protection for public health and environmental quality goals. This paper examines how public officials in three states--Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Texas--address the question of state control versus local autonomy through their efforts to shape fracking policy decisions. While local officials within Texas have succeeded in developing fracking ordinances with relatively little interference from state regulators, Colorado and Pennsylvania have adopted a tougher policy stance favoring the retention of preemptive oil and gas statutes. Key factors that account for between state differences in fracking policy decisions include the strength of home rule provisions, gubernatorial involvement, and the degree of local experience with industrial economic activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents information on the eight editors who were invited to select manuscripts for consideration and managed the review process for the papers that appear in the Tribute section of the November 15, 2004 issue of the journal Environmental Science & Technology. All of them did theft doctoral work with researcher Walter J. Weber and eventually became professors themselves. Researcher Mitchell J. Small is a professor of civil and environmental engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania.