George Mason Law & Economics Center Workshop on Environmental Economics for Law Professors

 

Click here for more information.

Ernst & Young and Greenbiz Group Survey Released: 2013 Six Growing Trends in Corporate Sustainability

Recently, Ernst & Young "a global leader in assurance, tax, transactions and advisory services" and Greenbiz Group, an information service provider that assits companies to "integrate environmental responsibility into their operations" released a collaborative survey titled, 2013 Six Growing Trends in Corporate Sustainability (2013). According to the press release for 36-page document available here:

Despite the decreasing likelihood of regulation to address climate change — at least in the United States — greenhouse gas reporting and reduction efforts remain strong, and interest in water usage, efficiency and stewardship is on the rise.

Also rising is stakeholder interest in the sustainable sourcing and availability of raw materials intrinsic to a company’s ability to operate. And sustainability-focused surveys and questionnaires from customers, NGOs, investor groups, analysts, media organizations and others continue to grow in importance.

These trends suggest that sustainability efforts are now well-integrated into the corporate fabric of a growing number of large and midsized companies.
But the effectiveness of such efforts may be limited by internal systems that don’t allow companies to effectively measure, track and optimize their sustainability impacts, or to understand and manage the risks of insufficient action. To do so will require new levels of engagement by the C-suite, and more sophisticated methods of sustainability reporting and assurance. 

FAO Releases Yearbook of Forest Products for 2011

Recently the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), a United Nations organization that focues on "rais[ing] levels of nutrition, improv[ing] agricultural productivity, better[ing] the lives of rural populations and contribut[ing] to the growth of the world economy" released a report titled, FAO Yearbook of Forest Products 2011 (2013). The 358-page report is available here for download.

Prior editions of the report (1947-present) are available here.

WRI Working Paper Released: Striking the Balance: Ownership and Accountability in Social and Environmental Safeguards

Recently, the World Resources Institute, a global environmental think tank whose mission is “to move human society to live in ways that protect Earth’s environment and its capacity to provide for the needs and aspirations of current and future generations,” released a report authored by Gaia Larsen and Athena Ballesteros titled, Striking the Balance: Ownership and Accountability in Social and Environmental Safeguards (2013). The 28-page report available here discusses the following:

Executive Summary

Many governments around the world have put in place systems to help ensure that investments in changes such as infrastructure projects, government programs or new national laws do not bring undue harm to their citizens or environment. The effectiveness of these systems in successfully preventing negative impacts varies widely. Developing countries tend to have a particularly difficult time ensuring that investments within their borders meet minimum social and environmental standards. As a result, many financial institutions have established their own policies to help ensure that their investments do not result in harm to vulnerable communities or ecosystems. These policies are generally known as “safeguards.” Although safeguard policies provide vital protection against risks to people and the environment, properly designing and implementing these policies means navigating complex relationships between financial institutions, governments, and the citizens of recipient countries.

The World Bank (the Bank) has been at the forefront among multilateral development banks in developing safeguard policies. In recent decades, the Bank has experimented with different approaches to social and environmental protection. These approaches respond in part to variations in the way in which countries receive money from the Bank, such as investments in projects versus policies. They have also emerged in reaction to the changing global landscape. Some developing countries have become richer and created stronger systems to protect people and the environment. The global community has also realized the value of letting developing countries define their own development path. At the same time, the pressing need to protect our global common goods and most vulnerable communities has become more apparent.

This working paper seeks to help the Bank and other financial institutions take stock of experiences to date and distill lessons for the future. We look at four different approaches to protecting against social and environmental harm: the traditional safeguards approach, which applies to most project lending; the Use of Country Systems approach, which the Bank has applied to some project lending on a pilot basis; the approach used for Program for Results investments, which applies to the Bank’s results-based lending pilot; and the approach used for Development Policy Loans, which applies to loans that support changes to policies and institutions.

While all four of these approaches rely on the rules and institutions of the recipient country, they do so to different degrees. Through an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each of approach, we arrive at seven lessons for the World Bank and other financial institutions looking to balance ownership and accountabil¬ity in their social and environmental policies:

1. Building on country safeguard systems can enhance ownership and incentives for safeguard implementation.
2. Minimum standards and positive incentives can clarify requirements and encourage countries to strive toward more ambitious social and environmental goals.
3. Safeguard implementation requires anticipating risks, planning to deal with those risks, managing and monitoring implementation, and responding to harm.
4. Proper safeguard implementation requires people on the ground to engage, collaborate and problem solve.
5. Recipient country safeguard systems still need support.
6. Citizens play a key role in any effective safeguard system.
7. To successfully balance ownership and accountability, safeguard approaches need to recognize differences among countries, sectors, and projects. 

UNEP Report Released: Environmental Risks and Challenges of Anthropogenic Metals Flows and Cycles

Recently, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), released a new report produced by the International Resources Panel titled, Environmental Risks and Challenges of Anthropogenic Metals Flows and Cycles (2013). The 234-page report available here, discusses the following:

[t]his report, compiled by a group of international experts, focuses on the impact of metals on the environment as well as on their life cycle energy use. Currently, primary metals production is responsible for 7 – 8 % of the total global energy use as well as for severe local environmental impacts. The report suggests to apply best available techniques and to increase recycling of metals, which not only requires significantly less energy per kg metal produced than primary production but also helps decreasing the overall local impacts of mining. However, even if recycling rates are increased, rising global demand for many metals will remain a huge environmental challenge in the next decades worldwide.

Main issues of concern for policy-makers presented in this report:

• presently, the demand for metals is rising rapidly and this trend is expected to continue for the next decades
• a shift towards a renewable energy system implies the material, and especially metal, intensity of energy production will increase even faster
• in future, the energy intensity of the production of metals may increase as a result of mining lesser grade ores. For some metals, a trend of decreasing ore grades is visible, and for more it may become visible over the next decades

UNEP Report Released: Recent Trends in Material Flows and Resource Productivity in Asia and the Pacific 2013

Recently, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), released a new report titled, Recent Trends in Material Flows and Resource Productivity in Asia and the Pacific 2013. The 36-page report available here, discusses the following:

[t]his report is intended to supplement the original Resource Efficiency: Economics and Outlook for Asia and the Pacific report (UNEP 2011). The content is based on an updated material flows database which presents data up to 2008, and the onset of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). The scope of this report is considerably narrower than the original report, focussing on deepening quantitative analyses specifically relating to primary material flows in the ten greatest resource consuming countries in Asia and the Pacific, and the trajectories of related resource efficiency indicators.

IRRC Institute Report Released: Integrated Financial and Sustainability Reporting in the United States

Recently, the Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute (IRRC), "a not-for-profit organization . . . [which] serve[s] as a funder of environmental, social and corporate governance research" released a report titled, Integrated Financial and Sustainability Reporting in the United States (2013). The 290-page report available here, discusses how,

[e]very company in the S&P 500 except one reports some form of sustainability disclosure, but fewer quantify those disclosures in terms of bottom line impacts, accordi"ng to a new report from the IRRC Institute (IRRCI) and the Sustainable Investments Institute (SI2). That report is the first to comprehensively benchmark the status of integrated reporting in the U.S.
. . .
The 285-page report analyzes sustainability disclosures on a sector-by-sector basis, and examined a total of 56,000 individual data points, across both mandated SEC filings and voluntary sustainability reports. The report examined disclosures for 2012. Looking across the entire S&P 500, the report discovered that:

• 499 companies made at least one sustainability related disclosure, but only 7, or 1.4% integrate financial and sustainability reporting. Zions Corporation is the only company not to include any sustainability disclosure across the various reports examined. The 7 companies which included a statement on integrated reporting were American Electric Power, Clorox, Dow Chemical, Eaton, Ingersoll Rand, Pfizer and Southwest Airlines.
• Nearly three quarters (74 percent) of the companies placed a dollar figure on at least one sustainability-related initiative, though they frequently also mentioned other initiatives whose benefits/costs were not quantified.
• 43.4% of the companies linked executive compensation to some type of sustainability criteria.

A webinar to review the report findings is scheduled for Friday, May 3, 2013, at 2 PM ET (Register here).

CRS Report Released: International Climate Change Financing: The Green Climate Fund (GCF)

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), the public policy research arm of Congress, recently issued the report International Climate Change Financing: The Green Climate Fund (GCF) (Apr. 16, 2013). The 16-page report authored by Richard K. Lattanzio, discusses the following:

Summary

Over the past several decades, the United States has delivered financial and technical assistance for climate change activities in the developing world through a variety of bilateral and multilateral programs. The United States and other industrialized countries committed to such assistance through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, Treaty Number: 102-38, 1992), the Copenhagen Accord (2009), and the UNFCCC Cancun Agreements (2010), wherein the higher-income countries pledged jointly up to $30 billion of “fast start” climate financing for lower-income countries for the period 2010-2012, and a goal of mobilizing jointly $100 billion annually by 2020. The Cancun Agreements also proposed that the pledged funds are to be new, additional to previous flows, adequate, predictable, and sustained, and are to come from a wide variety of sources, both public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance.

One potential mechanism for mobilizing a share of the proposed international climate financing is the UNFCCC Green Climate Fund (GCF), proposed in the Cancun Agreements and accepted by Parties during the December 2011 conference in Durban, South Africa. The fund aims to assist developing countries in their efforts to combat climate change through the provision of grants and other concessional financing for mitigation and adaptation projects, programs, policies, and activities. The GCF is to be capitalized by contributions from donor countries and other sources, including both innovative mechanisms and the private sector. Currently, the GCF complements many of the existing multilateral climate change funds (e.g., the Global Environment Facility, the Climate Investment Funds, and the Adaptation Fund); however, as the official financial mechanism of the UNFCCC, some Parties believe that it may eventually replace or subsume the other funds. While many Parties expect capitalization and operation of the GCF to begin shortly after the November 2013 conference in Warsaw, Poland, many issues remain to be clarified, and some involve long-standing and contentious debate. They include what role the CGF would play in providing sustained finance at scale, how it would fit into the existing development assistance and climate financing architecture, how it would be capitalized, and how it would allocate and deliver assistance efficiently and effectively to developing countries.

The U.S. Congress—through its role in authorizations, appropriations, and oversight—would have significant input on U.S. participation in the GCF. Congress regularly determines and gives guidance to the allocation of foreign aid between bilateral and multilateral assistance as well as among the variety of multilateral mechanisms. In the past, Congress has raised concerns regarding the cost, purpose, direction, efficiency, and effectiveness of the UNFCCC and existing international institutions of climate financing. Potential authorizations and appropriations for the GCF would rest with several committees, including the U.S. House of Representatives Committees on Foreign Affairs (various subcommittees); Financial Services (Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade); and Appropriations (Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs); and the U.S. Senate Committees on Foreign Relations (Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection); and Appropriations (Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs). As of April 2013, the U.S. Administration—through its State,

Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 150 account—has made no specific budget request for appropriated funds to be contributed to the GCF.

WRI Working Paper Released: Striking the Balance: Ownership and Accountability in Social and Environmental Safeguards

Recently, the World Resources Institute, a global environmental think tank whose mission is “to move human society to live in ways that protect Earth’s environment and its capacity to provide for the needs and aspirations of current and future generations,” released a report authored by Gaia Larsen and Athena Ballesteros titled, Striking the Balance: Ownership and Accountability in Social and Environmental Safeguards (2013). The 28-page report available here discusses the following:

[m]any governments around the world have put in place systems to help ensure that investments in changes such as infrastructure projects, government programs or new national laws do not bring undue harm to their citizens or environment. The effectiveness of these systems in successfully preventing negative impacts varies widely. Developing countries tend to have a particularly difficult time ensuring that investments within their borders meet minimum social and environmental standards. As a result, many financial institutions have established their own policies to help ensure that their investments do not result in harm to vulnerable communities or ecosystems. These policies are generally known as “safeguards.” Although safeguard policies provide vital protection against risks to people and the environment, properly designing and implementing these policies means navigating complex relationships between financial institutions, governments, and the citizens of recipient countries.

FAO Report Released: Enabling Environments for Agribusiness and Agro-industries Development

Recently the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), a United Nations organization that focues on "rais[ing] levels of nutrition, improv[ing] agricultural productivity, better[ing] the lives of rural populations and contribut[ing] to the growth of the world economy" released a report titled, Enabling Environments for Agribusiness and Agro-industries Development (2013).  The 71-page report available here,  discusses the following:

[t]he existence of a conducive business climate, or enabling environment, is considered essential to engender economic growth and development. However, what “an enabling environment” should encompass in practical terms remains elusive to many scholars and policy makers, particularly when discussed at the sub-sector level. This publication by FAO’s Rural Infrastructure and Agro-Industries Division (AGS) examines issues associated with enabling environments with a focus on agribusiness and agro-industrial sectors, which have not had their peculiar characteristics sufficiently examined in traditional appraisals of business climates. Based on a series of workshops and consultations organized by AGS in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America, the report reviews existing frameworks for general enabling environment assessments and discusses their relevance to agribusiness and agro-industries. It also discusses the challenges of enabling environment reforms and identifies a number of essential, important and useful enablers that are particularly relevant to agrifood business climate appraisals and upgrading.

TEEB Report Released: Organizational Change for Natural Capital Management: Strategy and Implementation

This month, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), a "a global initiative focused on drawing attention to the economic benefits of biodiversity" released its report Organizational Change for Natural Capital Management: Strategy and Implementation (2013). The 47-page document available here, discusses the following:

Organisational Change for Natural Capital Management: Strategy and Implementation is based on data from 26 businesses across nine industrial sectors (60 per cent of them with revenues of over US$10 billion), which are implementing behavioural and organisational changes to promote natural capital management.

The main findings of the study include:

• A small group of pioneering companies, who recognise the growing business case for NCM, are moving NCM forward and expect to build it deeply into their business within the next 3 years.

• Their rationale is that they will be much better positioned than other companies to manage and thrive in a resource-constrained world that could have serious implications for business in 3-5 years.  

• Delaying the measurement and management of natural capital carries a significant business risk for companies regarding the availability of key raw materials and maintaining competitive advantage.  

• In particular, the availability of freshwater, renewable energy, climate regulation, fibre and food were identified as the most important natural capital risks in the next 3 -5 years.  

• Current barriers to change for business on NCM are at the macro-level (e.g. lack of government regulation and customer demand) and organisationally. In particular challenges at the organisational level include establishing the relevance of NCM to the business, and a lack of harmonised methods to measure, prioritise and integrate natural capital into business decision-making.

• NCM is a business innovation that changes business processes, practices, systems and strategies. It is therefore a major driver of organisational change.

CRS Report Released: Environmental Considerations in Federal Procurement: An Overview of the Legal Authorities and Their Implementation

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), the public policy research arm of Congress, recently issued the report Environmental Considerations in Federal Procurement: An Overview of the Legal Authorities and Their Implementation (Jan. 7, 2013). The 27-page report authored by Kate M. Manuel and L. Elaine Halchin discusses the following:

Summary

Coupled with increasing concerns about the environment, the magnitude of federal spending on contracts has prompted questions from Members of Congress and the public about the role of environmental considerations in federal procurement. These include: to what extent do agencies consider environmental factors when procuring goods or services? What legal authorities presently require or allow agencies to take environmental factors into account when acquiring goods or services? How are existing provisions authorizing agencies to consider environmental factors implemented? This report provides an overview, answering these and related questions.

The federal procurement system is designed “to deliver on a timely basis the best value product or service to the customer, while maintaining the public’s trust and fulfilling public policy objectives.” Environmental objectives can generally be among the public policy objectives that factor into federal procurement. However, they are not necessarily the most significant objectives overall or in any specific procurement. There are numerous other objectives (e.g., obtaining high quality goods and services at low prices, promoting American manufacturing, protecting small businesses, fostering affirmative action) that can also factor into procurement decisions. The relationship and prioritization among these different objectives is not always clear.

Various legal authorities currently require or allow contracting officers to take environmental considerations into account when procuring goods and services. These authorities can be broadly divided into three categories: (1) “attribute-focused” authorities, generally requiring agencies to avoid or acquire products based on their environmental attributes (e.g., ozone-depleting substances, recovered content); (2) general contracting authorities, allowing agencies to purchase goods with certain environmental attributes when they have bona fide requirements for such goods; and (3) responsibility-related authorities, which require agencies to avoid certain dealings with contractors that have been debarred for violations of the Clean Air or Clean Water Acts. “Attribute-focused” authorities arguably do not deprive vendors of ineligible products of due process or equal protection in violation of the U.S. Constitution. However, certain preferences for products with desired environmental attributes, or vendors of such products, could potentially violate procurement integrity regulations and the Competition in Contracting Act if not based in statute. Use of evaluation factors based on environmental considerations is possible in negotiated procurements, but subject to certain conditions, and the reportedly lower lifecycle costs of “green” products do not, per se, mean that their acquisition is justified on a “best value” basis.

Agencies generally implement these authorities by relying on third-party designations of products with specific environmental attributes and using standard purchasing methods, including bilateral contracts, the Federal Supply Schedules, and government-wide commercial purchase cards.

Beginning with President Obama’s 2009 Executive Order on “Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance,” the Obama Administration has taken steps to promote consideration of environmental factors in federal procurement. Recently, for example, the General Services Administration (GSA) reported on plans to incorporate consideration of greenhouse gas emissions inventories into federal procurement decisions, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation was amended to require that contractors report on their purchases of biobased products under service and construction contracts. Certain such initiatives have prompted controversy, however. Some Members of Congress sought to restrict the Department of Defense’s purchase of biofuels as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2013, and some commentators have objected to GSA’s use of the LEED rating system for buildings.

UNEP Report Released: SIDS-Focused Green Economy: An Analysis of Challenges and Opportunities

This month, the United Nations Environment Programme released its SIDS-Focused Green Economy: An Analysis of Challenges and Opportunities (2013). The 28-page document available here, discusses how,

[t]he Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 marked the first time that the special characteristics of SIDS were paid significant attention and were recognized as a distinct group. In 1994, the first Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of SIDS was held in Barbados, under the auspices of the United Nations. It resulted in the adoption of the Barbados Programme of Action (BPOA), which recognized the unique and particular vulnerabilities of SIDS and identified the sustainable development challenges SIDS face. The BPOA explicitly identified key areas requiring urgent action.

 

UNEP Report Released: The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for Water and Wetlands

This month, the United Nations Environment Programme released a report titled, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for Water and Wetlands (2013). The 84-page document available here,

presents insights on both critical water-related ecosystem services and also on the wider ecosystem services from wetlands. The objective is encourage additional policy momentum, business commitment, and investment in the conservation, restoration, and wise use of wetlands. The report seeks to show how recognising, demonstrating, and capturing the values of ecosystem services related to water and wetlands can lead to better informed, more efficient, and fairer decision making. Appreciating the values of wetlands to both society and the economy can help inform and facilitate political commitment to policy solutions.

Ceres & World Wildlife Fund Report Released: Power Forward: Why the World’s Largest Companies are Investing in Renewable Energy

Yesterday, Ceres an international "advocate for sustainability leadership" and the World Wildlife Fund,  a leading conservation organization focused on saving endangered species,  issued a report titled, Power Forward: Why the World’s Largest Companies are Investing in Renewable Energy (2012). According to the press release for the 48-page report available here,

Large corporations are increasingly turning to renewable energy to power their operations. Companies are investing in renewable energy because it makes good business sense: renewable energy helps reduce long-term operating costs, diversify energy supply and hedge against market volatility in traditional fuel markets. It also enables companies to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goals and demonstrate leadership on broader corporate sustainability and climate commitments.

This report shows that a majority of Fortune 100 companies have set a renewable energy commitment, a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction commitment or both. The trend is even stronger internationally, as more than two-thirds of Fortune’s Global 100 have set the same commitments.

Through two dozen interviews with Fortune and Global 100 executives and analysis of public disclosures, the report finds that clean energy practices are becoming standard procedures for some of the largest and most profitable companies in the world, including AT&T, DuPont, General Motors, HP, Sprint, and Walmart.

UNEP Report Released: A New Angle on Sovereign Credit Risk, E-RISC: Environmental Risk Integration in Sovereign Credit Analysis

Yesterday, the United Nations Environment Programme released a new report titled, A New Angle on Sovereign Credit Risk, E-RISC: Environmental Risk Integration in Sovereign Credit Analysis (2012). The 40-page report available here, examines five test countries including Brazil, France, India, Japan and Turkey and addresses how,

[l]oss of soils, forests and fisheries, as well as rising resource costs, are likely to become increasingly important to a nation’s economic health, and may affect its ability to repay or refinance sovereign debt, says the study issued by the United Nations Environment Programme’s Finance Initiative (UNEP FI).

The report suggests that factoring the way a country manages natural assets into sovereign bond ratings may not only give investors increased transparency when making investment decisions, but also encourage governments issuing sovereign debt to manage their natural resources more sustainably in order to attract investors over the medium to long term.

Congressional Research Service Report Released: U.S. Renewable Electricity: How Does Wind Generation Impact Competitive Power Markets?

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), the public policy research arm of Congress, just issued the report U.S. Renewable Electricity: How Does Wind Generation Impact Competitive Power Markets? (Nov. 7, 2012). The 27-page report authored by Phillip Brown, 

analyzes the impacts of wind generation on competitive power markets, including financial and economic impacts on electric power generators. Overall, the goal of this report is to provide context for several electricity market concepts that are relevant to understanding the economic effects of wind power generation. Additionally, this report addresses three specific questions about the market interaction of wind power and electric power generators: (1) How might wind power affect wholesale market clearing prices? (2) Does wind power contribute to negative wholesale power price events within competitive electric power markets? and (3) Does wind power impact electric system reliability? This report focuses on data and information available for competitive electricity markets that are managed by a regional transmission operator (RTO) or independent system operator (ISO). Specific information for three RTO/ISO organizations is provided in this report: (1) Midwest Independent System Operator (MISO), PJM, and (3) Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT). These three RTOs were selected for the analysis in an effort to limit the scope of this report. Furthermore, these RTOs are commonly cited as markets that are being affected by wind power generation. As a result, there is no discussion of wind power market impacts within cost-of-service, vertically integrated electricity markets that are common in the West and Southeast regions of the United States, nor is there any discussion of how wind power is managed by federally owned transmission system operators such as the Bonneville Power Administration.

Congressional Research Service Report Released: Natural Gas in the U.S. Economy: Opportunities for Growth

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), the public policy research arm of Congress, just issued the report Natural Gas in the U.S. Economy: Opportunities for Growth (Nov. 6, 2012). The 35-page report authored by Robert Pirog and Michael Ratner discusses the following:

Summary

Due to the growth in natural gas production, primarily from shale gas, the United States is benefitting from some of the lowest prices for natural gas in the world and faces the question of how to best use this resource.

Different segments of the U.S. economy have different perspectives on the role natural gas can play. Suppliers, which have become the victims of their own production success, are facing low prices that are forecast to remain low. Some companies that have traditionally produced only natural gas have even turned their attention to oil in order to improve their financial situation. Smaller companies are having a difficult time continuing operations and larger companies, including international companies, have bought into many shale gas assets. Prices have remained low even as consumption has increased, in part, because producers have raised production to meet the demand and because companies have improved efficiency and extraction techniques. Some companies, many with large production operations, have applied for permits to export natural gas. This has raised concerns from consumers of natural gas that domestic prices will rise. The debate regarding exports is ongoing.

Industries that consume natural gas have seen input costs drop, and some have heralded low natural gas prices as the impetus for a manufacturing revolution in the United States. Some companies have begun to make major investments to take advantage of the low natural gas prices, particularly in petrochemicals. Other companies are waiting to see if prices will remain low long enough to warrant major investments in new facilities. Meanwhile, the electric power sector has already seen a transition from coal-fired generation to natural gas. Low natural gas prices are also putting pressure on renewable sources of power generation. However, increases in demand will put upward pressure on natural gas prices.

The transportation sector, the one part of the economy vulnerable to foreign energy supplies, is beginning to explore ways to use more natural gas. Transportation makes up less than 1% of U.S. natural gas consumption and would require billions of dollars in investment to increase that share significantly.

All of the change that has taken place so far has occurred despite environmental concerns and regulatory developments at the state and federal level that might curtail production. Natural gas is a fossil fuel that produces various pollutants, some more than other fossil fuels and some less. Methane, the major component of natural gas, is also a potent greenhouse gas when released without burning. Other environmental concerns focus on water use and disposal in hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas from shale formations.

Over the next five years, many of the issues being debated now may be decided. The industry and market are adapting to the newly found supplies and the concerns associated with them, as well as integrating more natural gas into the economy. There are many evolving issues some of which Congress can influence directly because of statutes and some indirectly. On the demand side, legislation has been introduced regarding exports of liquefied natural gas and alternative fuels for vehicles. There has been other legislation related to environmental regulations of natural gas.

EPA Event: Importance of Water to the United States Economy Symposium

EPA is conducting a study on the

importance of water in the U.S. economy to better understand how water contributes to the economic welfare of the nation and plays a critical role in many sectors of the U.S. economy. On December 4, EPA and American University will host a public symposium in Washington, D.C. with speakers that represent a diverse array of industries including agriculture, food and beverage production, manufacturing, recreation, tourism and fishing. EPA will also release a draft report on the importance of water to the U.S. economy. To register to attend the symposium, click here.

 

Additionally, EPA held a workshop on September 19, in Washington, D.C. to present the findings from background papers and to engage a diverse mix of analysts and decision-makers from different regions and sectors of the economy in a discussion. Topics included challenges that private and public sector decision-makers face in managing and using water resources, methods and tools analysts use to generate information to support decision-making, and gaps in information that would improve management and use of water resources. Click here for materials from the workshop. For more information, contact John Powers (powers.john@epa.gov or 202-564-5776).

Net Worth: The Economic Value of Fisheries Conservation - US FWS

This report from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service dated Fall 2011 highlights the $3.6 billion in annual contributions to the U.S. economy made by the Fisheries Program and
its many partners: states, tribes, NGOs and private organizations.