{
  "id": "RL30414",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL30414",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 101767,
      "date": "2000-02-03",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:39:15.012941",
      "title": "Global Climate Change: The Role for Energy Efficiency",
      "summary": "Increased energy efficiency is generally thought to be the primary way to reduce the nation's\ngrowth\nin CO2 emissions. As result, it occupies a prominent role in proposals to curb future emissions. The\nClinton Administration's 1993 Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) sought to stabilize year 2000\nemissions at the 1990 level. Global recognition that year 2000 stabilization would not be achieved\nled to the 1997 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change third conference of\nparties (COP-3) in Kyoto, Japan, where new emission reduction targets were proposed for 2008-\n2012. Subsequently, the Clinton Administration's Climate Change Technology Initiative (CCTI)\nproposed increased energy efficiency research and development spending, tax credits, and other\npolicies to promote energy efficiency to curb emissions.\n  A debate has emerged over estimates of the potential for energy efficiency to further slow the\ngrowth of CO2 emissions. The Department of Energy issued a report by five national laboratories\nentitled  Scenarios of U.S. Carbon Reductions: Potential Impacts of Energy Technologies by\n2010\nand Beyond . Also known as the  Five-Lab Study , it projects that energy efficiency \ntechnology\ncombined with a permit price of $50 per ton of carbon could bring 2010 emissions to a level just\nbelow the 1990 stabilization level. The  Five-Lab Study  projects that energy efficiency\ncould account\nfor 50% to 90% of the projected emissions reduction in 2010. This contribution would be achieved \nthrough an interaction between higher energy costs due to carbon permit prices that range up to\n$50/ton of carbon and a choice of response options that include substitution of lower carbon fuels\nand promotion of more energy efficient equipment.\n  However, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) issued a critique of the  Five-Lab\n Study \nentitled  Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on U.S. Energy Markets and Economic Activity . \nEIA finds\nproblems with key DOE assumptions about new energy-efficient technologies, which include \"...\nincreased performance and lower costs for new technologies, new [unspecified] government policies\nthat promote adoption into the market, and a greater propensity by consumers to buy them than they\nhave shown in the past.\" EIA further criticizes the  Five-Lab Study  for assuming an\naggressive R&D\nprogram and a 1.9% annual economic growth rate, which is 10% lower than EIA's assumption of\na 2.2% rate. Moreover, EIA says the  Five-Lab Study  end-use models likely include\nsome double\ncounting of emission reductions. \n  Also, there is a debate over the analysis of actual CO2 emission reductions from past energy\nefficiency measures. In this case, methodological issues are at the core of disagreements between\nthe General Accounting Office (GAO) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) about the\nbest way to assess emission savings from EPA's various energy efficiency programs. \n  Federal efforts to curb global climate change through increased energy efficiency may be\naffected by a number of issues being debated by Congress, including program appropriations, new\ntax incentives, and legislation on electricity restructuring.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL30414",
          "sha1": "4f58667f6ece6ecabbea6bf934f2e825a9fc11c2",
          "filename": "files/20000203_RL30414_4f58667f6ece6ecabbea6bf934f2e825a9fc11c2.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20000203_RL30414_4f58667f6ece6ecabbea6bf934f2e825a9fc11c2.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations"
  ]
}