Overview
Title
To prohibit Federal agencies from considering, in taking any action, the social cost of carbon, the social cost of methane, the social cost of nitrous oxide, or the social cost of any other greenhouse gas, unless compliant with Office of Management and Budget guidance, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to make sure that when the government decides on rules about the environment, they don't just use special numbers about how gases like carbon affect us, unless they're following the rules from a certain office. They also have to tell Congress how they've used those numbers in the past.
Summary AI
The bill, known as the “Transparency and Honesty in Energy Regulations Act of 2024,” seeks to prevent Federal agencies in the United States from using the social cost of greenhouse gases, such as carbon, methane, and nitrous oxide, in their regulatory actions. It prohibits considering these costs in any cost-benefit analysis, rulemaking, issuance of guidance, or any other agency actions unless they comply with guidance from the Office of Management and Budget. It also requires Federal agencies to report to Congress on past uses of these social costs in rulemaking and other actions since 2009.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, titled the "Transparency and Honesty in Energy Regulations Act of 2024," seeks to alter how federal agencies evaluate the environmental impact of greenhouse gases. Specifically, it prohibits these agencies from considering the social costs of carbon, methane, nitrous oxide, and other greenhouse gases in their decision-making processes, unless such calculations align with guidance from the Office of Management and Budget. The bill outlines specific definitions for these social cost metrics, referencing various governmental documents and estimates, and mandates federal agencies to report past uses of these metrics to Congress.
Summary of Significant Issues
The primary issue is the bill's outright prohibition on the consideration of social costs associated with greenhouse gases, which could significantly impact environmental accountability. This prohibition limits federal agencies' ability to incorporate environmental costs into their cost-benefit analyses, potentially undermining informed decision-making regarding climate policy and regulation.
Ambiguities abound in the bill's text. Vague references to future or unpublished documents related to social cost definitions present interpretative challenges. Furthermore, inconsistencies and typographical errors, such as the incomplete definition of "Federal agency," introduce legal uncertainties.
Another point of concern is the requirement for federal agencies to retrospectively report on activities dating back to 2009. This extensive timeframe could impose a logistical burden due to the potential difficulty in accessing historical records. Moreover, the bill lacks penalties for non-compliance, which could weaken the enforcement of the reporting provision.
Impact on the General Public
Broadly, the bill seeks to shift the way environmental costs are considered in federal policy-making. By restricting the use of social cost metrics, there is a risk that environmental and health costs may be underestimated, potentially leading to policies that fail to address the full impact of greenhouse gas emissions. This change might mean fewer regulations aimed at reducing emissions, which could affect public health and climate resilience over time.
Communities that are particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts, such as those in low-lying coastal areas or regions already experiencing significant air pollution, might be negatively impacted if the bill results in weaker environmental protections.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Environmental Advocates: This group might view the bill negatively, as it seemingly reduces the weight given to environmental and social considerations in policymaking. The inability to account for greenhouse gases' social costs could hinder efforts to advance comprehensive environmental regulations.
Federal Agencies: Agencies involved in environmental regulation may find themselves constrained by this bill when developing policies and conducting analyses. The prohibition could lead to fewer tools at their disposal for justifying regulations that include environmental considerations.
Business and Industry Groups: Many businesses, especially those in industries with significant greenhouse gas emissions, might favor this bill. Fewer regulations based on social cost considerations could mean reduced compliance costs and fewer restrictions on operations.
Economists and Policy Analysts: Professionals in these fields may express concern over the prohibition's potential to skew cost-benefit analyses of regulations. Comprehensive analyses typically include environmental and social costs to make balanced policy decisions.
In summary, while the bill proposes changes intended to streamline regulatory processes, it raises several substantial concerns about environmental accountability and regulatory clarity. The impact of these changes would vary across stakeholder groups, further complicating the landscape of U.S. environmental policy.
Issues
The prohibition on considering the social costs of greenhouse gases, including carbon, methane, and nitrous oxide, as stated in Section 3, could limit environmental accountability and hinder comprehensive cost-benefit analyses in regulatory processes. This might impede informed decision-making and raise concerns about the potential negative impacts on environmental protection standards.
The vague language regarding future and unpublished documents in the definitions section (Section 2) creates ambiguity, particularly with phrases like 'any successor or substantially related document.' This open-endedness could lead to varying interpretations and difficulties in precisely identifying applicable documents.
The definitions in Section 2 employ multiple documents to describe terms like 'social cost of carbon,' which may lead to complexity and difficulty for readers trying to follow the references, causing confusion about which specific document versions should be used.
The definition of 'Federal agency' in Section 2 is potentially incomplete or incorrect. The wording 'means has the meaning given the term \\"agency\\" in section 551 of title 5, United States Code' appears to be a typographical error, leading to uncertainty and legal ambiguity.
Section 4 requires federal agencies to report on actions using social costs since January 2009. This may create a significant workload due to the long time frame, requiring extensive records that might not be easily accessible.
The lack of specific penalties or consequences for failing to submit the report within the 120-day deadline in Section 4 could undermine the compliance and effectiveness of the reporting requirement.
There are overlaps in definitions and referenced documents for terms like 'social cost of carbon,' which may lead to confusion about the distinctions between different social costs of greenhouse gases as described in Section 2.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this Act states that it can be referred to as the “Transparency and Honesty in Energy Regulations Act of 2024”.
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, the Act defines important terms like Federal agency, which is based on a definition from United States Code, and various social costs related to carbon, greenhouse gases, methane, and nitrous oxide. These social costs include estimates from specific government documents that assess the economic impacts caused by emissions of these substances.
3. Prohibition on considering the social cost of greenhouse gases, including the social cost of carbon, the social cost of methane, and the social cost of nitrous oxide Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section prohibits any federal agency from considering the social costs related to carbon, methane, nitrous oxide, or greenhouse gases in their decision-making processes. This includes not using these social costs in cost-benefit analyses, rulemaking, issuing guidance, or justifying any agency actions.
4. Report to Congress Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section mandates that the leader of each Federal agency must send a report to specific Congressional committees within 120 days after this Act becomes law. The report should detail the agency's recent use of social cost metrics, like the social cost of carbon, in rulemaking or cost-benefit analyses since January 2009.