An Act to Require Rules Designed to Reduce Climate Change to Include Estimates of the Reduction in Adverse Climate Effects and of the Cost to Consumers
Summary
LD 495 would require the Department of Environmental Protection, when adopting rules intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to prepare an estimate using sound scientific information and methods of two things: the amount of adverse climate effects that would be prevented by the emissions reduction, and the consumer costs associated with the rule. The bill specifically points to likely price impacts on gasoline, diesel fuel, electricity, heating oil, and propane.
In practical terms, the bill would add an analytical requirement to the rulemaking process for climate-related regulations. It does not itself create a new emissions standard or repeal any existing environmental rule, but it would direct DEP to quantify both the expected climate benefits and the cost burden on consumers before adopting such rules. That would affect how the department develops and justifies future greenhouse gas reduction measures, especially those with energy-price implications.
Impact
The bill would amend Maine law governing DEP rulemaking by requiring benefit-and-cost estimates for rules designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It would affect the Department of Environmental Protection’s administrative process and could influence future climate and energy regulations by making consumer cost estimates, including fuel and electricity prices, part of the record. The bill’s focus is on greenhouse gas reduction rules and the economic effects on households and businesses that pay for transportation and heating energy.
Sentiment
The voting history suggests the bill faced significant opposition. The House first adopted a majority ought not to pass report by a 76-68 vote, and the Senate later accepted that report by a 20-14 vote. No committee transcript was provided, but the recorded votes indicate the bill did not command broad support and was ultimately rejected. The pattern suggests concern among a majority of legislators about the bill’s approach to climate-rule analysis.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be whether climate regulations should be required to include formal estimates of both environmental benefits and consumer costs. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a transparency and accountability measure, ensuring that policymakers and the public can see the expected climate gains alongside the price impacts of regulation. Opponents likely objected that the requirement could complicate or slow climate rulemaking, or that it could be used to challenge or discourage emissions-reduction rules by emphasizing consumer costs. The recorded votes show the measure was divisive, with enough support to be seriously considered but not enough to pass.
Requires applications for energy facilities to take into consideration the 2021 Act on Climate and how the facility may advance or delay the greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
Requires applications for energy facilities to take into consideration the 2021 Act on Climate and how the facility may advance or delay the greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
Requires applications for energy facilities to take into consideration the 2021 Act on Climate and how the facility may advance or delay the greenhouse gas emissions reductions.