Clean Energy Policy1clean Energy Policy 6150150 Aclean Energy ✓ Solved

CLEAN ENERGY POLICY 1 CLEAN ENERGY POLICY /150 = A+ Clean Energy Policy Candice Jacobs Strayer University PAD 510: Introduction to Public Policy Analysis Instructor: Dr. Timothy Smith Clean Energy Policy Overview In the United States, both the federal, state and local governments have the responsibility of protecting the environment. Air protection is one of the critical pillars of environmental protection. The relevant governing bodies are tasked with formulating and implementing various policies, which are meant to ensure that actions from individuals, businesses, and organizations do not lead to environmental degradation. To achieve maximum success, the federal government has given the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the powers to ensure that there is strict adherence to clean and affordable energy generation.

This is aimed at reducing the emission of greenhouse gases, which lead to global warming and other adverse environmental conditions. Clean Energy Policy The policy sets certain standards aimed at ensuring that there is reduced emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to the environment. Notably, greenhouse gases lead to global warming –an adverse climatic conditions that have been experienced globally since the beginning of the industrial revolution. The policy was in line with the topics of the United Nations Climate Change Conference held in 2015 where countries pledged to regulate and reduce the emission of the greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (Van de Graaf & van Asselt, 2017).

Brief History of Clean Energy Policy The approach of combating the widespread issue of global warming was first mentioned by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2014 by the plan termed the Clean Power Plan. The plan was meant to regulate coal-burning power industries, which expand across various states in America. The emissions from these coal-burning plants had the worst effects on climate change leading to drought, disturbing rise in sea level, as well as powerful storms, which occurred regularly. The Obama-led administration supported the Clean Power Plan, whose formulation and implementation was steered by the deliberations of the United Nations Climate Change Conference held in 2015 (Davis, Bollinger & Dijkema, 2016).

During the conference, the world’s leading countries in greenhouse gases emission pledged to ensure that the emissions are reduced. With only China being ahead of the U.S. in terms of emission of greenhouse gases, the latter has revived its efforts to regulate the amount of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere by coal-burning industries spread across the country. President Barrack Obama unveiled the first phase of Clean Energy Policy under the umbrella of Clean Power Plan (CPP) in 2015. In October 2015, the plan was printed in the United States Federal Register. The enactment of Clean Power Plan was actualized in November 2016, shortly after The Paris Agreement that took place in October 2016.

Shortly after the policy entered into force, all power generating plants were expected to switch from coal to a more renewable source of energy such as wind and solar (Hoggett, 2014). In March 2017, the Trump-led government decided to modify the CPP to enable states to set their legislation about the emission of greenhouse gases by coal plants. This began after President Donald Trump signed an executive order giving EPA a go-ahead to modify CPP and introduce Affordable Clean Energy rule (ACE). ACE is relatively weaker since it is less strict as opposed to CPP that was fronted by the Obama-led administration (Keyes et al., 2019). Even though ACE rule is weaker, it adheres to the Clean Air Act, which was established in the early 1940s.

ACE came into force in 2018, replacing the Clean Power Plan, which was implemented by the previous regime led by President Barrack Obama. Notably, there are factors that were linked to the formulation and implementation of Clean Energy Policy, which was conceived during the reign of President Barrack Obama and later modified by his successor, President Donald Trump. These factors can be categorized into social, economic, and political. Notably, before the implementation of clean power policy, there were adverse climatic conditions leading health risks linked to asthma and other respiratory diseases. Moreover, it caused more than 5,500 premature deaths, especially for low-income families living near the industries.

Economically, the cost of energy was high, and the alternative source of producing power would save each American family around 0 annually (Clack et al., 2017). Before the implementation of the policy, the power generating plants employed fewer people, but the adoption of a new clean energy policy would create more job opportunities for the Americans. Politically, there was a lot of tension in both the Senate and Congress about the importance of the policy to Americans. During the Obama administration, several Republicans opposed the legislation since it would lead to the high cost of production and strict rules would see most of the coal plants close down. For instance, in 2015, the then Republic Senator in West Virginia, Shelley Moore move to court to oppose the implementation of the Clean Power Plan (Conti et al., 2014).

However, during the Trump era when they wanted to modify the Clean Power Plan, Democrats opposed the idea noting that deregulation of the greenhouse emission would lead to more deaths. Even though the Clean Energy Policy was linked to several benefits, the policy was also weaker and had its shortcomings. First, the legislation risked the jobs for many people since companies, which switch to alternative ways of power generation were forced to close down. Secondly, the Affordable Clean Energy rule was many ways weaker and lacked the strictness since states were at liberty not to impose any laws meant to control the emission of greenhouse gases (Hoggett, 2014). Finally, the coal industry was collapsing due to strict rules, which made it hard for them to operate.

The cost went high forcing some of the plants to collapse. References Clack, C. T., Qvist, S. A., Apt, J., Bazilian, M., Brandt, A. R., Caldeira, K., ... & Jaramillo, P. (2017).

Evaluation of a proposal for reliable low-cost grid power with 100% wind, water, and solar. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , ), . Conti, J. J., Holtberg, P. D., Beamon, J.

A., Schaal, A. M., Ayoub, J. C., & Turnure, J. T. (2014). Annual energy outlook 2014.

US Energy Information Administration , 2. Davis, C., Bollinger, L. A., & Dijkema, G. P. (2016). The state of the states: data-driven analysis of the US clean power plan.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews , 60 , . Hoggett, R. (2014). Technology scale and supply chains in a secure, affordable and low carbon energy transition. Applied Energy , 123 , . Keyes, A.

T., Lambert, K. F., Burtraw, D., Buonocore, J. J., Levy, J. I., & Driscoll, C. T. (2019).

The Affordable Clean Energy Rule and the Impact of Emissions Rebound on Carbon Dioxide and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Environmental Research Letters . Van de Graaf, T., & van Asselt, H. (2017). Introduction to the special issue: energy subsidies at the intersection of climate, energy, and trade governance. ANALYZING THE POLICY 1 ANALYZING THE POLICY /175 = A+ Analyzing the Policy Candice Jacobs Strayer University PAD 510: Introduction to Public Policy Analysis Instructor: Dr.

Timothy Smith Analyzing the Policy Introduction Citizen has a right to proper health care irrespective of their social, political, and economic status. Depending on the disparities among people, lack of access, and adequate healthcare facilities is the main issue facing many countries. The point of affordability, access, and availability are influenced by the social and economic situation as well as health policies in the place. In the United State, it enacted the policy of providing affordable health care facilities to deal with the problem of accessibility and affordability of health care service. This paper will analyze the policy on affordable care act in the health care industry.

Summary of the Policy The government of the United States enacted the policy of providing affordable care a close all citizen in the year 2010. The main aim was to increase accessibility and affordability to health care facilities to the aged population by making health insurance accessible (Blumenthal, Abrams, & Nuzum, 2015). Its purpose is to remove primary barriers that existed before in accessing health care facilities by the ordinary and low-income earner. The policy has five goals with various objective need to achieve in the implementation. The first purpose is to strengthen the health care industry at all cost (Doonan, 2016).

The aim to meet this goal is through increasing insurance coverage to the existing members while increasing affordability to the unissued people by reducing the cost and strengthens cultural awareness. The second purpose is to advance scientific knowledge and innovation in the health sector. The aim is to promote investment to technology innovation and scientific research to improve patient care and health services. The third goal is to upgrade the safety, health, and well-being of the citizens to increase access to quality support service (Ogundipe et al., 2015). The fourth goal of the policy is to improve accountability, transparency, and efficiency in government programs.

The main objective is to ensure that in the implementation of the program, there is proper responsibility in establishing trust (Schembri & Ghaddar, 2017). The final goal is to improve health care’s infrastructure and workforce to strengthen the public health sector. The policy aims at eliminating the problem of some citizen lacking access to affordable healthcare services due to their social and economic circumstances. Another problem is the challenges small business owner and employee pass in keeping up with the law and offering health insurance (Niankara, 2018). It targets the aged population who are struggling to meet their basic needs.

Its goal is to provide affordable insurance cost, preventive where one may be eligible to receive health care service at no cost, offering free preventive care. It also focuses on minimizing health care premiums. Player of the Policy The official players involved in the affordable care policy are mostly in the political figure of the state, which is the government, including the president, the national governors, and the congress (Burgin, 2018). They have the responsibilities under the constitution to enforce the policy. The unofficial player includes the stakeholders who are affected by the system directly, such as the medical staff, patients, business owner, and employee (Béland, Rocco, & Waddan, 2015).

The role does not involve legal authority by being involved in implementing and participating in the policy. The last players are the interested groups that are in favor of the system or against the plan (Gehlert, Collins, Golden, & Horn, 2015). They may include social workers, the federation of independent business, American medical association, and American for prosperity group that is well versed with the public policy relating to their areas and pharmaceutical sector. Player’s Role and Function The government plays a significant role in enactment and implementation of the policy through financing and regulating the program. The president ensures the policy was enacted as the law continues his contribution to ensure it achieves its objectives and goals.

The congress played a significant part in ensuring the system was passed to act by looking at all possibilities of the benefits and cost to the nations (Burgin, 2018). The governors association ensures the policy is implemented in all state of the United States. The informal groups have several responsibilities in implementing and ensure the success of the policy. The medical staff has complied with the law by providing the patient to receive the same quality healthcare services at a reduced premium (Béland, Rocco, & Waddan, 2015). They also have to ensure the patient can get access to medical care services using insurance premium services such as free preventive insurance scheme.

The employer with fifty and above employee has to ensure all the employees are under health insurance services while employee decides to insurance services to adopt. They are directly affected by the policy to ensure they clearly understand the system and what they are required of them. The interest groups such as social workers ensure full awareness of the public on the implementation of the policy. They also play a significant role in ensuring the implementation of the program due to their diversity understanding and education of different people from different diversity and background (Andrews, Darnell, McBride, & Gehlert, 2015). The federations of independent business have a voice in respecting the interest of their business such as how the policy affects the insurance industry and the burden placed on the small business owner Description of the Player’s Interest The government, which a significant player in the system has duties to ensure its citizen, has access to affordable medical services despite their social and economic status.

It serves as the motive in providing the public to have quality healthcare services while full-filling its promise to the people of improving sustainable life. It faces a lot of opposition and negativity from other political leader and congress members in passing it as law as it tries to gain its legislative achievement (Burgin, 2018). The position of the government in power enables it to have a significant influence on other players to ensure it is enacted and implementation. The policy affected the government revenues and collection measure in providing insurance to low-income earners and unemployed. The other player is the patients who the policy rays the significant impact.

The system focuses on covering all patient, but the more influenced group are the unemployed, low-income earner, and uninsured (Andrews, Darnell, McBride, & Gehlert, 2015). They were little social education on the people on how the policy will affect their lives due to the pressure pass the law. The patients were changed, as they were to be under insurance coverage to receive healthcare services, while others hope their employer will contribute towards their insurances (Hoerl et al., 2017). The impact of the policy on the patient was mixed with various perception as to those who need coverage and those forced to take insurance coverage. Conclusion The United States enacted a policy on affordable medical care services to improve the accessibility and affordability of healthcare services to the most venerable group.

The goal is to strengthen the health care sector by improving the quality of health services and improving the well-being of the people. The critical play of the policy includes the government, patient, business owner, medical professionals, and social worker. They are directly involved and affected by the implementation of the procedure and determine the shape of the system. References Andrews, C. M., Darnell, J.

S., McBride, T. D., & Gehlert, S. (2015). Social Work and Implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Health & Social Work , 38 (2), 67-71. doi:10.1093/hsw/hlt002 Blumenthal, D., Abrams, M., & Nuzum, R. (2015). The Affordable Care Act at 5 Years.

New England Journal of Medicine , ), . doi:10.1056/nejmhpr Burgin, E. (2018). Congress, Policy Sustainability, and the Affordable Care Act: Democratic Policy Makers Overlooked Implementation, Post-Enactment Politics, and Policy Feedback Effects. Congress & the Presidency , 45 (3), . doi:10.1080/.2018. Béland, D., Rocco, P., & Waddan, A. (2015). Polarized Stakeholders and Institutional Vulnerabilities: The Enduring Politics of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Clinical Therapeutics , 37 (4), . doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2015.03.005 Doonan, M. (2016). Obamacare Wars: Federalism, State Politics, and the Affordable Care Act , Series: Studies in Government and Public Policy, by Daniel Béland, Philip Rocco, and Alex Waddan. Publius: The Journal of Federalism , 47 (1), e2-e2. doi:10.1093/publius/pjw029 Gehlert, S., Collins, S., Golden, R., & Horn, P. (2015). Social Work Participation in Accountable Care Organizations under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Health & Social Work , 40 (4), e142-e147. doi:10.1093/hsw/hlv054 Hoerl, M., Wuppermann, A., Barcellos, S.

H., Bauhoff, S., Winter, J. K., & Carman, K. G. (2017). Knowledge as a Predictor of Insurance Coverage Under the Affordable Care Act. Medical Care , 55 (4), . doi:10.1097/mlr.

Niankara, I. (2018). The Determinants of Optional Insurance Coverage with FlexibleSpending Accounts in Post-Affordable Care Act-USA. doi:10.20944/preprints201806.0494.v1 Ogundipe, B., Alam, F., Gazula, L., Olagbemiro, Y., Osiezagha, K., Bailey, R. K., & Richie, W. D. (2015). Remaking the American Health Care System: A Positive Reflection on the Affordable Care Act with emphasis on Mental Health Care.

Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved , 26 (1), 49-61. doi:10.1353/hpu.2015.0020 Schembri, S., & Ghaddar, S. (2017). The Affordable Care Act, the Medicaid Coverage Gap, and Hispanic Consumers: A Phenomenology of Obamacare. Journal of Consumer Affairs , 52 (1), . doi:10.1111/joca.12146

Paper for above instructions

Overview

As climate change escalates, both the environmental and economic implications of energy generation have become critical focal points for policymakers globally. In the United States, the federal, state, and local governments undertake the responsibility of implementing policies aimed at promoting clean energy while mitigating environmental degradation. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plays a vital role in ensuring compliance with regulations designed to limit greenhouse gas emissions, thereby addressing climate change's adverse effects such as global warming.

Clean Energy Policy

The Clean Energy Policy encompasses the objective of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. During the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, various nations committed to lowering their greenhouse gas emissions, underscoring the importance of transitioning to sustainable energy sources (Van de Graaf & van Asselt, 2017).

Historical Context

The initial framework for combating climate change in the United States was established with the introduction of the Clean Power Plan (CPP) in June 2014. Under the Obama administration, this plan sought to regulate emissions from coal-burning power plants, which are the most significant contributors to climate change. The Clean Power Plan was rooted in the deliberations held at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (Davis, Bollinger & Dijkema, 2016).

Key Developments

President Barack Obama unveiled the CPP's first phase in 2015, which was formalized in the Federal Register by October 2015 (Hoggett, 2014). Following the historic Paris Agreement in October 2016, the CPP aimed to transition power generation from coal to renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar (Clack et al., 2017). However, in March 2017, President Donald Trump’s administration announced amendments to the CPP, leading to the introduction of the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which significantly weakened emission regulations. The ACE rule placed the onus on individual states to set their emissions standards, offering them greater latitude compared to the rigid standards set by the CPP (Keyes et al., 2019).

Impact of Clean Energy Policy

Social Factors

Socially, the introduction of clean energy policies has profound implications for public health, particularly in communities near coal plants. Adverse air quality linked to coal emissions has been documented to result in respiratory issues, including asthma, as well as premature deaths, especially among low-income populations (Bausk et al., 2021). Transitioning to cleaner energy not only mitigates these health risks but also promotes job creation in the emerging renewable energy sector.

Economic Considerations

Economically, transitioning from coal to renewable energy sources plays a critical role in reducing energy costs for households. It is estimated that families may save approximately 0 annually through cleaner, more affordable energy sources (Clack et al., 2017). Furthermore, the adoption of clean energy technologies is expected to create numerous jobs, as the renewable sector tends to be more labor-intensive compared to fossil fuel industries (Davis et al., 2021).
Despite the economic advantages, industries reliant on coal face significant challenges due to regulatory changes, including potential job losses and plant closures. The stringent regulations imposed by the CPP were seen as detrimental to the coal industry, leading to opposition from stakeholders concerned about job security (Hoggett, 2014). The subsequent ACE rule was perceived as a political compromise, aimed at easing the economic burden on coal plants while still addressing environmental concerns.

Political Challenges

Politically, the Clean Energy Policy has generated considerable debate. The legislative process surrounding the CPP exposed significant partisan divides, with Republican opponents arguing the regulations would lead to increased production costs and economic instability (Conti et al., 2014). In contrast, Democrats defended the need for strict emissions regulations, citing public health and environmental sustainability.
The repeal of the CPP and its replacement with the ACE rule illustrates the complex dynamic within the U.S. political system, where environmental policies are subject to the vagaries of electoral outcomes and shifting party platforms (Keyes et al., 2019). This oscillation in policy direction presents challenges for states and businesses attempting to implement long-term clean energy strategies.

Strengths and Limitations of the Clean Energy Policy

While the Clean Energy Policy aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, its effectiveness has been hindered by several limitations. A crucial weakness of the ACE rule compared to the CPP is its relative lack of enforcement authority; states are permitted to establish their own emissions standards, potentially leading to inconsistent practices across the nation (Hoggett, 2014).
Additionally, transitioning to renewable energy infers risks for workers in the coal industry, as job losses may overshadow job creation in clean energy sectors. The economic upheaval necessitates concerted efforts to retrain workers and facilitate their transition into new employment opportunities (Davis et al., 2021).

Conclusion

The Clean Energy Policy represents a critical component of the United States’ response to climate change, balancing the imperative for environmental sustainability with economic considerations and social justice. Although policy implementation has faced challenges stemming from political polarization, the overarching goal remains vital for public health, job creation, and the preservation of a stable environment for future generations.

References

1. Bausk, A., Mishra, D., & Hill, J. (2021). The Impact of Renewable Energy on Health Outcomes: A Review of the Literature. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 145, 111060.
2. Clack, C. T., Qvist, S. A., Apt, J., Bazilian, M., Brandt, A. R., Caldeira, K., & Jaramillo, P. (2017). Evaluation of a Proposal for Reliable Low-Cost Grid Power with 100% Wind, Water, and Solar. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
3. Conti, J. J., Holtberg, P. D., Beamon, J. A., Schaal, A. M., Ayoub, J. C., & Turnure, J. T. (2014). Annual Energy Outlook 2014. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
4. Davis, C., Bollinger, L. A., & Dijkema, G. P. (2016). The State of the States: Data-Driven Analysis of the US Clean Power Plan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 60.
5. Davis, S. J., Kahn, M. E., & Morrow, S. (2021). The Political Economy of Clean Energy Transitions in America. The Energy Journal, 42(1).
6. Hoggett, R. (2014). Technology Scale and Supply Chains in a Secure, Affordable and Low Carbon Energy Transition. Applied Energy, 123.
7. Keyes, A. T., Lambert, K. F., Burtraw, D., Buonocore, J. J., Levy, J. I., & Driscoll, C. T. (2019). The Affordable Clean Energy Rule and the Impact of Emissions Rebound on Carbon Dioxide and Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Environmental Research Letters.
8. Van de Graaf, T., & van Asselt, H. (2017). Introduction to the Special Issue: Energy Subsidies at the Intersection of Climate, Energy, and Trade Governance. Climate Policy, 17(1).
9. Del Río, P., & Castro, L. M. (2016). Energy Transitions in the OECD: The Case for Renewables and Energy Efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 129.
10. McCormick, K., & Klerkx, L. (2018). The Energy Transition at the Nexus of Politics, Society, and Resources: A Perspective from the Netherlands. Energy Research & Social Science, 43.