Browsing by Author "Cook, Jeffrey J., author"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5

Open Access
2016 state advanced energy legislation: year-to-date
(Colorado State University. Libraries, 2016-09) Hoffer, Katherine Heriot, author; Cook, Jeffrey J., author; Plant, Tom, author; Center for the New Energy Economy, publisher
As of mid-September, 253 advanced energy-related bills have been enacted across the country. The Center for the New Energy Economy has identified four key highlights thus far.
Open Access
2016 year in review: state advanced energy legislation
(Colorado State University. Libraries, 2016-12) Hoffer, Katherine Heriot, author; Cook, Jeffrey J., author; Lyng, Jeff, author; Plant, Tom, author; Center for the New Energy Economy, publisher
As of mid-December, 344 advanced energy-related bills have been enacted across the country. The Center for the New Energy Economy (CNEE) has identified three key highlights.
Open Access
Part 1: Driving renewable energy markets: the conventional approach
(Colorado State University. Libraries, 2016-09-08) Cook, Jeffrey J., author; Culkin, J., author; Edmonds, C., author; Hoffer, K. H., author; Lyng, J., author; Manning, D., author; Plant., T., author; Center for the New Energy Economy, publisher
States have long played an important role in driving energy efficiency markets. The more conventional approach to driving these markets has been the adoption of Energy Efficiency Resource Standards (EERS). This paper describes the historical adoption of EERS policies, the extent of existing market certainty associated with these policies, the outlook for future market certainty, and concludes with policy considerations for improving market certainty via EERS policy revisions.
Open Access
Part 3: Driving renewable energy markets: the conventional approach
(Colorado State University. Libraries, 2016-08-25) Hoffer, Katherine Heriot, author; Cook, Jeffrey J., author; Culkin, J., author; Edmonds, C., author; Lyng, J., author; Manning, D., author; Plant, T., author; Center for the New Energy Economy, publisher
State Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPSs) have been important drivers of renewable energy markets. This third paper in our innovation series examines historical adoption of, and amendments to RPSs, existing market certainty associated with these policies, and the outlook for future market certainty. By 2026, the target dates for 29 state RPS policies will have been reached. This paper offers suggestions for mitigating the potential impacts on market certainty associated with expiring RPSs.
Open Access
Setting the record straight: interest group influence on climate policy at the Environmental Protection Agency
(Colorado State University. Libraries, 2017) Cook, Jeffrey J., author; Duffy, Robert, advisor; Davis, Charles, committee member; Davis, Sandra, committee member; Kroll, Stephan, committee member; Rinfret, Sara, committee member
It is clear that interest groups are involved in the rulemaking process at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but it has been difficult to determine whether certain groups are more influential on outcomes. This debate persists because the literature illustrates that groups can be influential at discrete stages in the process, but the field rarely analyzes the entire rulemaking process. This uncertainty has spurred controversy regarding the EPA's recent climate change regulations. Therefore, this dissertation conducted three case studies of recent climate change regulations and addresses three questions. First, what, if any, strategies did interest groups use to influence the content of these climate change rules? Second, did these strategies translate into influence? Third, what can these climate change case studies tell us about the role of interest groups in other controversial rules at the EPA, and across the bureaucracy more broadly? Ultimately, I argue that interest group influence was generally balanced across each of the three case studies. These findings then serve as the basis to develop my Regulatory Spheres of Influence Framework. The framework illustrates that given the nature of EPA rulemakings, it is very difficult for one side either business or environmental to dominate the process in highly controversial rules. It is possible that these conclusions track to other controversial rules across the bureaucracy and I note that my framework could be applied in other contexts to test this assertion.