Articles Tagged: Michael Canes

Fossil Fuel Energy and Economic Wellbeing

The George C. Marshall Institute is pleased to announce the publication of a new study by Dr. Michael Canes, Fossil Fuel Energy and Economic Wellbeing. Executive Summary. Today, fossil fuels supply better than 86 percent of the marketed energy used worldwide. The proportions of oil, gas and coal vary by region but basically these three […]

U.S. Energy Emissions Holding Steady

U.S. carbon dioxide emissions continue to drop, reaching levels not seen since the early 1990s, according the Energy Information Administration (EIA).  The deep economic recession accounts for some of this decline, but it is illustrative to note that U.S. gross domestic product has posted growth since late 2009 (see http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth).  Even assuming for lags in industrial […]

Is Cap & Trade the Wrong Policy to Curb Greenhouse Gases for the United States?

Jul20 Is Cap & Trade the Wrong Policy to Curb Greenhouse Gases for the United States? 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm

A Comparison of a Cap & Trade System v. Alternative Policies to Curb U.S. Greenhouse Gases

Feb22 A Comparison of a Cap & Trade System v. Alternative Policies to Curb U.S. Greenhouse Gases 12:00 pm – 1:30 pm

Don’t Limit LNG Free Trade

A new special interest group, America’s Energy Advantage, is advocating restrictions on LNG exports in an effort to manipulate prices, thereby allowing AEA member companies to enjoy outsized gains on the sale and export of their products.

Economics of Military Energy Use

After the Solyndra Corporation’s bankruptcy and the loss of over a half-billion dollars in federal clean energy loan guarantees, Congress has become more wary of subsidizing commercially risky energy projects. A new question, however, has arisen over whether our military’s operational energy vulnerabilities might justify Defense Department “investment” in energy innovation. Interest in using the military to support everything from biofuels to the deployment of small modular reactors, though, raises several questions.

Economics of a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard

We find little justification for an LCFS as a means to reduce U.S. or state GHGs. Uncertainty over fuel lifecycle GHGs, the costs of such an approach and clear indication that there are far better means to reduce GHGs suggest it is a poor policy choice.

Partner & Fellow Blogs