Working on an economic story today? Here’s the latest from AEI experts on today’s economic stories.
America’s abundant and low-cost natural gas and electricity have more than offset higher labor costs in the U.S. and have contributed to the strongest profitability in a generation or more for U.S. manufacturers.
The environmental community is doing our country a great disservice by hanging on to its outdated and irrational opposition to zero-carbon nuclear.
The argument that the Price-Anderson liability limit is a “subsidy” is simply incorrect; it has become an obvious tool with which to divert attention from the indefensible subsidies and cronyism now bestowed upon “renewable” electricity, ethanol mandates and the other such manifestations of wealth redistribution through politics.
The FTC has no direct jurisdiction over power rates. And so why has it decided to address the net metering question, one that state regulators are fully capable of confronting?
The modern rationales for energy subsidies, such as energy independence, social cost of carbon and sustainability suffer from fundamental analytic weaknesses. It would be hugely productive for the U.S. economy writ large were policymakers to remove them.
The Federal Trade Commission is looking at competition and price in the Solar Power sector. However, Solar power is economically inefficient relative to other options. Therefore, to maximize consumer welfare there should be no competitors and an optimal price of zero.
If we’re serious about carbon reduction, we have to be serious about keeping existing nuclear plants operating and expanding the use of nuclear power.
The EPA has conducted a flawed social cost of carbon analysis that makes odd assumptions such as not discounting future benefits and considering global (rather than national) benefits of any carbon reduction.
The common argument that the sharp decline in oil prices during 2014–15 inevitably will lead to another
steep increase is largely unsupported by the data on current and futures prices.