As you've explored the various energy policies that have been implemented throughout US history, what do you notice about how they influence the energy systems themselves?

Let's look at some examples.

The 2008 Farm Bill has many provisions for renewable energy. Without these provisions (and the funding they carried) much of this work couldn't be completed. The money designated for competitive grants is designed to help quicken the pace of technology transfer from the research phase to on-the-ground projects.

• $2.1 billion in guaranteed loans for cellulosic projects
• $500 million for bioenergy and bio-based product research
• $500 million for renewable energy systems and energy efficiency grants

The 2014 Farm Bill (they generally only occur every 5-6 years) was especially problematic and delayed because of Congressional bickering. You can learn more about 2014 USDA Farm Bill highlights between the 2014 version and pre-2014 versions, but here are a few of them:

• It reduced mandatory funding for the Energy Title from $1.12 billion over four years (as specified in the 2008 version) to $694 million over 5 years. And while this reduces the scope and funding available for energy-related projects quite considerably, it does build upon important historical successes. The Rural Energy for America Program (known as REAP) helps agricultural producers and rural business owners (and rural electricity cooperatives!) in the form of loan guarantees and competitive grants in all 50 states. Under this iteration of the Farm Bill, it's the top-funded program.
• With the new Trump Administration, changes have been made to this grant program, and new applications are currently frozen and not being accepted until September 30, 2025, at the earliest.  There are some changes to the program in regard to elements from IRA that no longer apply. 

Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) - mandate that states generate a set percentage of their electricity from renewable sources. In the absence of the state being able to produce renewable-sourced electricity at home, they also have the option to buy Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) from other electricity suppliers. The benefits of an RPS system include improved air quality, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and, potentially, job creation in the emerging renewable sectors.

The Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency (DSIRE) is the go-to resource for U.S. energy policies. On their website, you can: 

• View a detailed, up-to-date map of RPS policies across the country
• Explore a summary map that highlights states with solar-specific requirements (called “solar carve-outs”) and rules supporting local, small-scale renewable energy (known as “distributed generation”)
• Visit DSIRE to see the latest information and find out what’s happening in your state!

The 2005 Energy Policy Act provided a host of provisions and measures related to the production, distribution, and types of energy we use in the United States. This list is FAR from exhaustive, but is just here to get you thinking about some of the impacts on energy systems we can have with our policy decisions.

• Increased the amount of biofuel (typically ethanol) required to be mixed with gasoline sold in the United States (to 4 billion gallons by 2006, 6.1 billion gallons by 2009, and 7.5 billion gallons by 2012). What impact do you think this provision alone has on energy systems? Is incentivizing increased production of ethanol sound energy (and environmental and climate) policy? Who are the winners and losers associated with subsidized ethanol production?
• Requires public electric utilities to offer net metering to customers on request.
• Authorizes $200 million for "clean coal" initiatives, increases coal as an energy source.
• Provides incentives to companies to drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico.

The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act directed more than $31 billion into clean energy projects around the country. You can read the Obama White House Retrospective Analysis to learn more. And of course, the recently passed 2022 Inflation Reduction Act has a host of provisions that impact energy and climate. Note that Trump EO 14154 revokes many elements of the IRA.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (2025) has a number of energy-related elements, in large part revising or scaling back on those within ARRA and IRA.  Some notable changes are eliminating the EV Mandate and scaling back wind and solar subsidies.  It increases critical mineral development. 

The Implementation of Energy Regulations

When a bill is passed by Congress and signed into law by the President, what happens next? If you take a look at many of the energy policy examples from earlier in this course (like the big table from Lesson 3), you'll see that the body of the legislation itself contains a timeline and plan for implementation. It calls out who the key players and administrative units will be and a timeline for how they'll actually go about incorporating this new law into their activities. It is essential to consider that Congress is not the body that actually implements the laws. The implementation and enforcement fall mainly to the Executive Branch, via the pertinent agency (see below for specifics). Agencies can then delegate some implementation to states and municipalities.

The subsequent pages of this lesson are devoted to the different types of energy policy and how they are implemented. I've tried to set each of them in real-world examples. As you work through the lesson, start thinking about how you will structure your discussion of policy implementation in your own Research Project. Implementation and monitoring are critical steps. A well-designed policy is no good to anyone if it is poorly implemented or ineffectively managed.

Who is implementing Energy Regulations?

When we look at energy-related regulations, at the Federal level, there are a handful of governmental agencies through which these policies are typically implemented. If something is delegated to a state, it is usually their corresponding agency that handles it.  For example, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection would be the EPA state equivalent.

• The Department of Energy is the biggest hub of energy-related information in this country. It regulates the imports and exports of fuels, domestic energy production, is responsible for all things nuclear - from weapons to energy to safety and disposal, and funds research related to energy technologies.
• The Department of the Interior works closely with the Department of Energy on matters related to onshore and offshore resource extraction.
• The Environmental Protection Agency handles policies related to climate change, air, and water pollution - all of which are linked to energy production and consumption. Climate policy proposals bought before Congress in recent sessions typically gave substantial (if not all) jurisdiction to EPA for the regulation of an emission trading system. In the absence of that, EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.
• The Department of Agriculture has a somewhat substantial role to play in climate policy (not as much in energy policy unrelated to climate, though) because of the emission sources and sinks associated with animal production, conservation tillage, and forest carbon sequestration.
• Even the Army Corps of Engineers plays a role in climate policy, in particular with regard to ensuring resiliency of federally constructed infrastructure, such as roads and dams. Interestingly, they are also the "largest generator of hydropower and renewable energy in the country," according to USO. 

Taxation is one mechanism relevant to energy policy we explored early in the course. By levying a tax on a good or service, the government can fairly accurately predict the cost of the policy. Let's take a closer look at state and federal taxes on fuel to understand the role taxes play in our energy policies, how they are implemented, and what is done with the revenue they generate.

Costs in a gallon of gasoline and diesel fuel (2016)

Click Here for Text alternative for Costs in gas and diesel fuel

What we pay for in a gallon of Gas vs. Diesel: (in percents)

Fuel Type	Price	Taxes	Distribution and Marketing	Refining	Crude Oil
Regular Gasoline (January 2023)	$3.34/gallon	15%	10%	20%	55%
Diesel (January 2023)	$4.58/gallon	13%	19%	28%	40%

Credit: EIA

Gas prices - we've watched them skyrocket as the war in Ukraine dragged on, disrupting supplies and making investors uneasy. But what are we really paying for when we fill up? This graphic illustrates the breakdown of the gasoline prices we pay at the pump.

Notice the top, light blue box devoted to taxes. This is comprised of both federal and state taxes. The federal tax on a gallon of gasoline in the US right now is 18.4 cents (24.4 cents on a gallon of diesel). According to EIA, in addition to that federal tax, states add an average of another 22.01 cents per gallon in excise taxes and 12 states also charge additional state sales or other taxes on gasoline. There are even some locations where county or city taxes can also be included in the price.

Learn more about the factors influencing the price of a gallon of gas.

What are the taxes levied on gasoline used for? Excellent question! The American Petroleum Institute updates this interactive map each year to illustrate the relative taxes in gasoline across the country. As you look at these numbers, remember that the federal excise tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents of the number that you see printed on this map. The rest is whatever additional tax that particular state charges.

Federal Gasoline Tax (18.4 cents/gallon)

• 15.44 cents/gallon to the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund
• 2.86 cents/gallon to the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund
• 0.1 cent/gallon to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund

In the case of the individual taxes levied by each state, there is much variability in how those revenues are utilized. Many states also contribute a portion of their taxes to the Underground Storage Tank Trust, or for state road work, or charge other environmental service fees. On top of the additional fuel taxes that states charge, there are 9 states that currently charge sales tax on gasoline as well.

It is worth noting that many European countries have significantly higher fuel tax rates than the U.S., which is why gas prices are higher in Europe - sometimes significantly so - than in the U.S.

What role do taxes on gasoline and other liquid fuels really play? Are they a deterrent to use? Not really. Are they meant to be? Not really. The taxes associated with liquid fuels finance projects related to the use of those fuels. People are going to drive, so if the government taxes the fuel they use, that creates a fund from which road maintenance can be completed. Storage tanks for these fuels will inevitably leak - having a fund set aside to handle the environmental problems associated with a fuel leak is another reasonable use of gasoline tax dollars.

But what about taxes for other purposes? We've talked earlier this semester about potentially taxing greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to slow down anthropogenic climate change. A carbon tax would serve a very different purpose than a gasoline tax. A carbon tax would be designed specifically to deter the use of carbon-intensive fuels by bringing their costs more in line with alternative energy sources. The revenue generated from a carbon tax could be used for a variety of programs to aid in a transition to a less carbon-intensive economy. One of the ideas that has gained some bipartisan traction is a revenue-neutral tax, which would divide tax revenue up and provide an equal amount to each citizen of the U.S.

As we learned, though, carbon tax (like any potential solution for pricing carbon) has its drawbacks. It is difficult to know how high the tax needs to be set to ensure the desired results. If set too low, firms may just be willing to pay the additional cost and continue on with business as usual, netting no real emission reductions. It also runs the risk of driving emitting firms out of the country, where they can emit freely without the costs of a tax. The implementation of a successful carbon tax would require an appropriately set tax rate and a strict enforcement mechanism to ensure all emissions are included in the accounting. Impossible? No. Challenging? Yes. Impossible? No.

Another way to reduce energy consumption and cut back on utility costs is through the adoption and implementation of an energy conservation policy. Energy conservation policies typically outline reduction targets.

DSIRE - DSIRE is the Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency and will prove an invaluable resource for you both during your time as a student and once you find yourself working as an energy industry professional. DSIRE is a comprehensive repository of all state-level incentives across the country for both renewable energy and energy efficiency programs. It also houses information about federal incentives and programs that extend beyond energy conservation. Be sure to consult this website to learn more about opportunities that exist in your own state, and opportunities that may be applicable to your Research Project, e.g. by piggybacking on existing incentive programs. (Sometimes the main site does not work, so I've included the website that includes the overview of state-level policies.)

ACEEE - the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy is also another wealth of information, specifically relating to energy conservation policies. You may want to view its State Efficiency Scorecard. 

Recent energy legislation passed at the federal level mandates conservation policies for federal buildings and purchases. Listed below are some of the highlights of these policies. To learn more about federal energy conservation efforts, read the full report from the Congressional Research Service on the Department of Defense Facilities Energy Conservation Policies and Spending (2009). Since the 1990s, the Federal Government has had Executive Orders setting energy efficiency and renewable energy goals for Executive Branch agencies and their facilities.  Executive Order 13423 (2007) was one of the earlier ones that integrated into one order a number of energy-related goals.  Many parts of EO 13423 on energy were codified into the Energy Policy Act of 2007.  These orders have also included greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and electronic product energy rating requirements. 

You should also take a look at the fully amended National Energy Conservation Policy Act. This act, initially passed in 1978, has been amended several times to meet the changing goals of national energy policy and the evolving technologies we can employ to meet these goals.

Energy Policy Act of 2005

• mandates use of advanced meters to reduce electricity use in federal buildings by October 1, 2012;
• adopts 2004 International Energy Conservation Code (Supplement to 2003) - requires revised energy efficiency standards and 30% reduction in consumption of new federal buildings over previous standards;
• requires the purchase of increasing percentages of renewable energy, beginning with 3% in 2005 to at least 7.5% in 2013 and after.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

• requires 30% energy reduction in federal buildings by 2015 (relative to 2005 baseline);
• designates 'covered facility' criteria for federal agencies to follow when implementing evaluations of energy and water and assigning energy managers;
• requires 55% reduced fossil fuel energy in new federal buildings (and major renovations) by 2010 (relative to 2003 baseline) and then a full 100% reduction in fossil fuels by 2030;
• requires that federal agencies must ensure energy life-cycle cost effectiveness for major equipment replacements, renovations, or expansions;
• prohibits federal agencies from leasing buildings that have not earned the EPA ENERGY STAR label;
• calls for the establishment of high-performance green building standards for all types of federal facilities, as well as green practices that can be used throughout the life of a facility;
• appropriates funds and private financing for Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs); permanently authorizes ESPCs;
• directs the Department of Defense to evaluate the use of ESPCs for non-building uses;
• requires that federal agencies can only procure alternative fuels whose life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions are not more than conventional emissions from petroleum-based sources.

Inflation Reduction Act of 2022

• "Extends credit for energy efficiency home improvements through 2032...Increases credit from 10% to 30%," adds an annual $1200 cap instead of lifetime limits;
• provides subsidy for home energy audits;
• provides funding for states to establish HOMES rebate programs for whole-house energy retrofits, with special funding available for low- to moderate-income individuals;
• provides significant incentives for various aspects of electrification (electrical panel upgrades, high-efficiency heat pumps and hot water heaters, and electric stoves);
• provides funding to help states establish programs to train contractors to install efficiency upgrades.

Some policies that may affect energy efficiency and conservation include:

• Environmental and Climate Justice Block Grants may be used for "projects related to climate change and air pollution...including air pollution monitoring, extreme heat risk mitigation, resiliency and adaptation, indoor pollution reduction, and community engagement."
• Neighborhood Access and Equity Grants may be used to reduce GHG emissions;
• The Rural Energy for American Program (REAP) received $2 billion in funding "to provide competitive grants and loan guarantees to farmers, ranchers, and rural small businesses for renewable energy systems or energy efficiency improvements," and the federal cost share for grants increased to 50% from 25%.
  Source: Bipartisan Policy Center

Energy conservation policy is a great example of a form of energy policy that can be implemented with much success at the local level. Energy conservation translates to avoided energy costs, and local municipalities and other governments are highly motivated to reduce operating costs. Programs with a local scale are more easily relatable to people, and therefore often enjoy greater success.

This graph illustrates the types of energy conservation policies employed by 2,176 local governments that responded to the 2010 Sustainability Survey administered by the International City/County Management Association. You can download the full survey results.

Percent of local government pursuing specific energy conservation policies.

Click Here for Text Alternative of local government-specific energy conservation policies

Percent of Local Government Pursuing specific energy conservation policies

Policy	Percentage of local government response
Energy audits of government buildings	62
Upgraded to higher energy efficiency lighting	55
Management systems to control heating and cooling	45
Purchase of fuel efficient vehicles	43
Higher energy efficiency heating and air conditioning systems	38
Traffic signals with improved efficiency	36
Streetlights with improved efficiency	30
Hybrid electric vehicles	23
Higher energy efficiency pumps in the water or sewer systems	23
Policy to only purchase energy Star equipment	16
Utilize dark sky compliant outdoor light fixtures	14
Installed Solar panels on a government facility	12
Fuel efficiency target for the government fleet of vehicles	11
Purchased vehicles that operate on compressed natural gas (CNG)	8
Generated electricity thorough municipal operations	7
Installed a geo-thermal system	6
Installed charging stations for electric vehicles	5

Credit: Urban Energy Policy Institute

One way the government can set prescriptive boundaries on energy consumption and signal development of more efficient technologies and products is through the adoption of efficiency standards and labeling. By establishing minimum requirements for a variety of energy usages (from utility companies to the DVD player you choose), they are driving the market to produce more efficient products. Labeling products empowers consumers to make more informed decisions about how the products they buy will impact their own electricity bills (and our climate!). Let's take a look at some of the efforts across the country to establish standards and provide labeling guidelines. Note that this list is far from exhaustive, and in addition to finding more examples domestically, a simple Google search will reveal countless international efforts underway to achieve similar results. The Collaborative Labeling and Appliance Standards Program (CLASP) does research on energy standards and labeling programs in the United States and elsewhere, and is worth checking out in this regard.

Energy Efficiency Resource Standards (EERS):

An EERS is similar to a Renewable Portfolio Standard in that it dictates a certain percentage by which a utility must reduce its energy use over time. These standards can be implemented in different ways, including through market-based systems of trading or the option to buy out and just purchase credits. Generally, the initial targets in the program are low and increase over time, allowing maximum flexibility for meeting goals. An EERS is an attractive approach to achieving real energy savings, because, instead of emphasizing the costs of the program, it focuses on the energy savings (and therefore avoided expenses). Many states have already implemented EERS programs, and several others have standards in development. 

While there is no federal EERS in place yet (several bills have been drafted, though), the patchwork efforts of states across the country represent a substantial portion of national energy use. If a federal EERS were to be enacted, states could continue to operate their state-level EERS programs in conjunction with the federal standard, and if state targets were higher, they could continue to work toward those goals.

Check out the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy site to learn more about initiatives in every state (also mentioned on previous page in regard to state conservation policies). The website also provides functionality for comparing state efforts against each other.

Labeling Products with Energy Efficiency Information:

Labeling products so that consumers can make informed choices about how the purchases they make will impact their utility bills and the environment is just one way to implement smart energy policies. Probably the most widely recognized labeling effort is that of ENERGY STAR.

There are two types of labeling utilized by the ENERGY STAR program with which you should be familiar.

The first is an endorsement label, and that's just this ENERGY STAR logo (at right) you have likely seen on a wide range of products. The label indicates to the consumer that this product is certified by the ENERGY STAR program. In order to earn the label, products must meet standards established by the EPA and to an extent, DoE. In addition to providing energy savings, ENERGY STAR-qualified products must also provide comparable performance and features consumers expect out of that category of product.

Visit the ENERGY STAR website to learn more about how a product (or building, plant, or new home) can earn this label.

The second type of label you should know about is a comparative label. As the name suggests, this type of labeling allows consumers to evaluate the energy efficiency of multiple products before selecting one. This familiar yellow labeling scheme contains information on kWh/year used for this model of product vs other similar models, and also offers consumers an estimate of yearly operating costs for the product. This label is associated primarily with home appliances. The information printed on these yellow labels is based on standardized testing procedures developed and prescribed by the DOE. All ENERGY STAR qualified appliances are required to also carry this label.

An Energy Guide Label

Credit: EnergyGuide by Cjfrysinger from Wikipedia (Public Domain)

What is primacy?

Primacy is the act of coming first or foremost. So when we look at patchwork networks of energy policies spanning all geographic scales from the local level through the international community, it's important to understand how primacy is determined and how this influences the implementation of a policy.

The most common level of interplay between different geographic scales, as it relates to primacy, is that between the state and federal governments. As you've learned in earlier lessons of the course, many issues relating to climate and energy policy have yet to be fully addressed at the federal level, leaving states to lead the way with innovative policy. This is an aspect of the fact that we are not a “straight democracy”; instead, we are a constitutional republic, which means states are given certain rights, separate from the Federal government. This allows for states to develop their own programs, as long as they are not in conflict with Federal rules, and in most cases, are at least as stringent as the Federal requirement (if there is one). Even with Federal polices, certain implementation elements are “delegated” to the states.  As the federal government 'catches up' to the states, what does that mean for the policies already enacted and implemented at individual state levels?

Let's look at tailpipe emission standards in California as an example of the battle for primacy:

California is the only state in the country with its own regulatory agency related to air quality, the California Air Resources Board. It was established in 1967 in the Mulford-Carrell Act and is a cabinet-level agency within the US EPA. Why don't any other states have a comparable entity? CARB was established before the Clean Air Act was passed at the federal level (in 1970). Other states are free to follow the CARB standards, but they do not have regulatory authority to establish any themselves - the federal act enjoys primacy over states in this matter.

While the federal government did recently update CAFE standards (which regulate passenger vehicle fuel economy), during the process, California decided they wanted to enact their own, more stringent Clean Car Standards, and 13 other states wanted to adopt them. As you might imagine, some vehicle manufacturers opposed this move (and challenged the ruling in court), recognizing that in order to stay competitive in these markets, their vehicles would need to progress to more stringent fuel economy standards more quickly than they initially considered under the federal standards because California and the other states constitute such a signifcant portion of the market.

The new standards began phasing in starting with model year 2009. To learn more about the proposed regulations, read this Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking from the Air Resource Board (updated February 2010).

The California tailpipe emissions example is one in which state primacy remained intact even with federal regulation. When discussions around emission trading on a national scale were circulating through the House and Senate, one of the primary concerns was whether state and regional programs would maintain primacy under a federal system, or if they would simply be absorbed. That case is a little different, though, because those regional emission trading programs were established with the consideration that, someday, a federal system would come along and take over. The smaller-scale programs were merely pilots or test cases to illustrate that greenhouse gas emissions could be reduced with a market-based approach, driving technological innovation and private investment. The likely outcome would not be for state primacy to be maintained in a federal cap and trade emission trading program, but rather to have those programs be folded into the larger federal system.

The function of primacy as it relates to public policy can be sensitive. States strive to maintain autonomy, and in the case of environmental and energy legislation, often act in areas very important to their interests if the federal government fails to do so. They spend considerable time and resources developing and implementing programs and, consequently, can be defensive against federal regulation preempting their efforts.

We could probably devote an entire lesson to all the energy-related grants and incentives available to citizens and companies. Instead, let's pick just a few examples and work through how this type of energy policy is implemented.

While the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is by no means a 'typical' piece of legislation, let's take a look at it, specifically, because it called out several types of energy-related grant and incentive opportunities.

When ARRA passed, so too did all of the provisions built into it to drive clean energy development and stimulate new job growth in the energy sector. As a taxpayer and informed citizen, it's important for you to understand where your tax dollars are going and what sorts of activities they fund. With ARRA, energy funding reaches across the spectrum from installation and adoption of smart grid technologies to improved efficiency to innovative research into carbon capture. I encourage you to check out DOE's ARRA website to learn more about how the stimulus package benefited clean energy. Briefly, here's a general list of the types of activities funded through grants and incentives in this important piece of energy policy.

• Modernizing the Electric Grid - $4.5 billion
• Energy Efficiency - $12 billion
• Renewable Energy - $1.64 billion
• Carbon Capture and Storage - $3.4 billion
• Transportation - $2.85 billion
• Science and Innovation - $2.0 billion (including about $40 million in loan guarantees)
• Environmental Cleanup - $6 billion

ARRA was a rather high-visibility piece of legislation, given the tremendous investment of taxpayer dollars. In addition to ARRA, there are many, many other opportunities available to citizens and organizations, and DSIRE is a very comprehensive repository of these programs. While the site is devoted primarily to state-level incentives, it also offers links to federal programs.

The Inflation Reduction Act provides a bevy of incentives and some loan guarantees. 

It is important to recognize the difference between subsidies and incentives.  Incentives are intended to influence behavior and encourage some action to be taken by “sweetening to deal,” so to speak.  A subsidy, on the other hand, is funding to make an action affordable enough to be taken.  Put simply, I could do something without any incentive, but having the incentive would make it more attractive.  If something needs to be subsidized, it means I cannot do it without the subsidy and still be financially prudent. 

We looked at several different types of policy earlier in this lesson. Enacting policy is only part of the puzzle to achieving a desired outcome. Enforcement mechanisms ensure that the policy is implemented and provide consequences for non-compliance. Let's take a look at the different types of enforcement mechanisms out there. The type of policy employed dictates the type of enforcement mechanism(s) necessary to keep the policy goals on track.  Let's take a look at the different types of enforcement mechanisms out there.

Generally, for the policy options we explored that are voluntary in nature (such as tax incentives, grant opportunities, and guidelines), there is no real need for any sort of enforcement mechanisms. But, for those policy options that have some sort of mandatory component (taxes, market-based approaches, and standards), there needs to be a system in place to ensure that the policy is actually enforced.

Generally, the energy policy document itself will detail who is in charge of ensuring compliance with the policy. The policy may even create a new office or establishment for managing the oversight of the policy (for example, 1974's Energy Reorganization Act established the Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

Keep enforcement mechanisms in mind as you research your Research Project policy. Which group or groups work together (or against one another) to achieve its stated goals? Ensure successful monitoring and implementation?

Intended Consequences: These are the outcomes that are not only desirable but sought after in developing an energy policy. If we're looking at a policy to implement higher fuel economy standards on passenger vehicles to reduce gasoline consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, and the policy effectively forces automakers to comply with these new standards, that's an intended policy consequence.

Unintended Consequences: When policy makers (energy policy or otherwise) are crafting policy design to handle specific issues, they need to pay careful attention not just to the consequences they're intending to achieve with the policy, but also the ones that might come along as byproducts of the policy design. When we talk about unintended consequences, we're usually referring to a negative, unforeseen consequence of a seemingly well-intentioned policy design. For example, one of the most prominent cases of unintended consequences in a policy related to energy is the case of ethanol. Policies enacted to stimulate corn ethanol production in the United States in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and dependency on foreign oil have come under harsh criticisms for a host of potential unintended consequences such as food scarcity, increased greenhouse gas emissions, increased food prices, water and air pollution, and ecosystem disruption. And more ironically, some research has shown that using ethanol creates as many lifecycle emissions as gas.

There are however, some times when the unintended consequences of energy policy are beneficial. One example of this can be found in the case of policies instituted to reduce carbon monoxide emissions from car exhaust. Reductions in carbon monoxide emissions in car exhaust appear to have led to a decrease in carbon monoxide poisoning suicides. (Curious? Read Unsuccessful Suicide by Carbon Monoxide: A Secondary Benefit of Emissions Control and Suicidal Asphyxiation by Inhalation of Automobile Emission without Carbon Monoxide Poisoning to learn more.

In assessing intended and unintended consequences, knowing the full life cycle implications of one policy over another is important.  For example, for energy sources, policy may focus on the “use phase” emissions.  But the full life cycle may tell a different story.  This topic has been of interest with solar energy, in that the life cycle footprint of solar panels has a much greater adverse environmental footprint than is implied by the low impact nature of “using” solar panels.  This does not necessarily mean solar should not be used, but understanding the full life cycle implications will lead to more informed policy making. 

Important concepts to take away from this lesson

In this lesson, we have looked at the various types of energy policies and have gone through examples of real-world implementation of these policies. As you can see, there's a complex web of mandatory and voluntary programs that comprise our national energy policy - having influence over everything from the gas you put in your car to the computer monitor you choose to purchase. The take-home message for this lesson is simple: Implementation of a successful energy policy (of any kind) requires significant forethought into the possible roadblocks to achieving stated goals and a clear delineation of who is responsible for what. It is important to anticipate criticisms and create policies that bridge gaps, not ones that further division.

In the next lesson, we're going to step away from public policy and into the private sector to find out what companies are doing with regard to energy and climate policy and how their choices influence and are influenced by what is happening in the public sector.

Reminder - Complete all tasks!

You have reached the end of the Lesson! Double-check the Lesson Requirements in Canvas to make sure you have completed all of the tasks listed there.