Washington, D.C., emits less carbon per person than any state in the country, yet energy costs in the District have climbed more than 93% over the past five years, the steepest increase in the nation, according to a new report from the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI). The report finds that D.C.’s aggressive local climate mandates are driving up bills for the residents least able to afford them while delivering no measurable effect on global climate change.

Authored by Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI, and John Kemp, an internationally recognized energy markets expert, “Washington DC: Lowest in Carbon Emissions, Highest in Increased Costs” examines the District’s energy profile, emissions record, and climate policies. It concludes that by trying to squeeze the last tons of carbon out of an already low-emitting system, D.C. has chosen the most expensive possible path to its net-zero goals.

D.C. emits less than 4 metric tons of carbon dioxide per resident, one-quarter of the national average of 14 tons. With more than 11,000 people per square mile, over 120 times the national average, the District combines exceptional density with small homes, heavy transit use and a near absence of manufacturing, making it the lowest-emitting jurisdiction in the country. Commuters use public transportation at seven times the national rate, and since 2005 the District’s total emissions have fallen 2.6% per year, more than twice the national pace.

Costs, however, are moving in the opposite direction. Inflation and surging wholesale prices across the PJM Interconnection, the regional grid strained by data center growth in northern Virginia, have pushed up bills throughout the Mid-Atlantic. But Maryland and New Jersey, also in PJM, saw increases of about 50% over the same period. The report attributes D.C.’s steeper climb in large part to local green energy mandates and estimates the District’s implied cost of carbon, or the price of abating one metric ton of CO2, at $750 to $870, roughly double that of the next-most-expensive states, Massachusetts and New Jersey, at $300 to $400 per ton.

“Washington is already the lowest carbon-emitting jurisdiction in the country on a per-person basis, and it is paying more than anyone else to squeeze out the last few tons,” said Brown. “Those costs fall hardest on renters and low-income families who can’t put solar panels on their roofs. Before going further, policymakers should ask whether each additional dollar is buying any real climate benefit.”

The report finds:

• D.C.’s Renewable Portfolio Standard, which requires 100% renewable electricity by 2032 and a growing in-District solar carve-out reaching 15% by 2041, has driven utility compliance costs from $50.6 million in 2018 to $272.6 million in 2025
• High solar credit prices allow property owners with rooftop panels to earn $2,200 to $3,200 a year in passive income, while more than half of households who are low-income or renters receive none of those subsidies and pay higher bills to fund them
• The District’s 2022 net-zero building mandate, which effectively bans natural gas in new construction and major renovations, pushes new demand onto the grid just as regional capacity tightens and prices surge
• Low-income residents in Wards 7 and 8 already carry energy burdens triple those of residents in wealthier Ward 3
• Residential electricity prices rose 24% in 2025 and another 23% in the first five months of 2026 compared with a year earlier

The report recommends that D.C. replace rigid, technology-specific mandates, including the solar carve-out and net-zero building standard, with market-based standards; lean into the District’s natural advantages by investing in energy efficiency and public transportation; and revisit the rationale for its net-zero goals, weighing the burden on low-income ratepayers against what the policies actually deliver for the global climate. Instead of working backward from an arbitrary net-zero date, the report argues, policymakers should subject each new climate policy to a rigorous cost-benefit test.

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @ppi.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) today applauded the introduction of the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026. The bill is a major bipartisan breakthrough that would help America build faster and more cheaply, lower energy costs, and strengthen its competitive edge. The bill delivers on Congress’s promise to reduce costs for working Americans and advance environmental justice by accelerating the infrastructure needed to deliver reliable, cleaner power to communities that have long borne the brunt of high bills and pollution.

Introduced Wednesday by Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), the bill unites the Republican chairs and Democratic ranking members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources and Environment and Public Works committees behind a plan to speed federal environmental reviews, give approved projects certainty that their permits will stand, and require data centers to pay all of their associated transmission costs.

The bill closely tracks the agenda in “Bureaucracy Blocks Green Progress: 9 Ideas for Democratic Permitting Reform,” authored by Colin Mortimer, Senior Director of Partnerships at PPI. Released in November 2025, the report argued that Democrats have much to gain by engaging in the permitting debate and set out to expand the proposals they could bring to negotiations with Republicans, warning that durable reform could not happen through one-party action.

“Permitting reform has stalled for years because Democrats feared losing environmental protections and Republicans feared a deal that would only help renewables. Sens. Heinrich, Lee, Capito and Whitehouse have shown there is a bargain that works for both sides,” said Mortimer. “This bill would get power lines, clean energy and critical infrastructure built faster and lower costs for families while keeping strong safeguards in place.”

The report documented the toll of the current system. According to the American Clean Power Association, permitting delays have cost more than $100 billion in lost investment, 150,000 U.S. jobs and 550 million metric tons of additional carbon emissions this decade, and the Business Roundtable estimates that about $1.5 trillion in investment is awaiting federal permits. Major clean energy projects such as the SunZia transmission line have taken nearly two decades to move from conception to construction.

“Permitting reform is an affordability issue and an environmental justice issue. Black and Hispanic families, including many in communities represented by members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Hispanic Caucus, spend a larger share of their income on energy and shoulder the cost when energy supplies do not meet demand,” said Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI. “Building more supply and new transmission faster means lower bills and lower emissions. That is why getting this bill across the finish line matters.”

The bill reflects the report’s recommendations in seven areas:

1. Environmental review shot clocks: PPI’s report called for strict enforceable deadlines for completing environmental reviews, after which a decision must be issued, citing models such as Washington state’s two-year deadline for environmental impact statements. The bill would strengthen enforcement of the existing one-year deadline for environmental assessments and two-year deadline for environmental impact statements, and require agencies to decide on outstanding permits within set windows once reviews are complete.

2. Limits on the scope of review: The report urged Congress to codify the Supreme Court’s 8-0 ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, which held that agencies need not analyze upstream or downstream impacts of activities they do not directly regulate, and to further define reasonable limits on the scope of review. The bill would require courts to give substantial deference to agencies on the scope and contents of their environmental reviews.

3. A 150-day statute of limitations: Because lawsuits under the National Environmental Policy Act can be filed up to six years after a final agency decision, the report recommended extending the 150-day window Congress set for surface transportation projects to all major federal permitting decisions, providing predictable timelines while preserving judicial review. The bill would set a 150-day deadline for challenges under environmental review, clean water, endangered species, and historic preservation laws, and for challenges to energy, mining, and forest restoration approvals under any federal law.

4. A “single front door” for federal permits: Drawing on reforms in New South Wales, Australia, and the Netherlands, the report called for a lead agency and coordinator responsible for one consolidated timetable, one environmental record and one final decision, with agency reviews conducted in parallel rather than in sequence. The bill would require concurrent agency reviews, a single environmental document and binding resolution of interagency disagreements.

5. Federal authority over power lines: The report recommended expanding FERC’s backstop siting authority to approve interstate transmission projects when states are slow to act or deny approval, preventing single-state vetoes of regionally necessary energy projects. The bill would strengthen federal transmission approval authority, including by dropping the requirement that lines sit in a federally designated corridor, and allow federal and state reviews of major lines to proceed simultaneously.

6. Resources and shared data for faster reviews: Arguing that permitting reform only works if agencies have the people and tools to carry it out, the report called for added review capacity and a centralized permitting repository of environmental data and past reviews, an idea the Department of Energy has begun to explore. The bill would authorize a $20 million annual permitting fund from 2027 to 2033, $150 million a year through 2031 for endangered species consultations, and shared data systems to help agencies reuse information from previous reviews.

7. Protection for approved projects: Pointing to presidents of both parties who have halted projects after approval, from the Keystone XL pipeline to the Revolution Wind offshore wind farm, the report called for preventing the unilateral revocation of duly approved projects. The bill would protect existing permits from cancellation or interference, with defined exceptions for court orders, violations of law, fraud, and urgent harm supported by new information.

The report also recommended two reforms the bill does not adopt: a “loser-pays” rule requiring unsuccessful plaintiffs to cover litigation costs, and revenue-sharing arrangements, like those in France and North Dakota, that deliver direct benefits such as property tax relief to towns and cities that host energy infrastructure. The bill does advance the report’s broader goal of reducing litigation delays by limiting who can sue and barring courts from halting projects over NEPA paperwork errors.

Read and download the November 2025 report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @ppi.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

WASHINGTON (August 27, 2026) — A new report from the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) finds that Maryland has built one of the country’s most energy-efficient, lowest-emitting economies, but warns that the state’s sweeping climate agenda is increasingly out of step with soaring electricity prices, shrinking federal support, and a widening capacity gap on the regional grid.

Authored by Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI, and John Kemp, an internationally recognized energy markets expert, “Maryland’s Climate Goals Facing a New Reality” examines the state’s path toward the targets set under its 2022 Climate Solutions Now Act, including a 60% cut in greenhouse gas emissions below 2006 levels by 2031 and net-zero emissions by 2045.

Maryland’s energy-related emissions per person are the lowest of any state, just 55% of the national average, thanks to a power mix dominated by zero-emission nuclear and lower-emission gas that has largely displaced coal. Total emissions have fallen more than twice as fast as the national rate since 2005. But like other states inside the PJM Interconnection, Maryland is now being squeezed by explosive data center growth in Northern Virginia, which is driving up regional wholesale power costs. Residential electricity prices climbed at an average annual rate of 2.4% between 2019 and 2024, nearly two-and-a-half times the national rate, and PJM wholesale prices jumped 47% in 2025 alone.

“Maryland has proven that a state can cut emissions faster than the rest of the country while keeping electricity bills manageable,” said Brown. “But the easy wins from switching off coal are behind it. Lawmakers should prioritize the programs that deliver real emissions reductions, protect the grid, and keep costs in check for ratepayers, rather than mandating an outcome the state’s own numbers say isn’t achievable on this timeline.”

The report notes that Maryland’s climate plan spans 21 separate initiatives, from EV charging expansion to farmland conservation to building electrification, at an estimated combined cost of $1 billion a year. That price tag is complicated by federal funding cuts under the Trump administration, which have put much of the financing Maryland officials were counting on in doubt. A January 2026 analysis from the University of Maryland’s Center for Global Sustainability projects the state will reach only a 42% emissions cut by 2031, far short of the 60% statutory goal.

Polling shows broad public support for expanding natural gas and nuclear generation to meet rising demand, while local measures such as Montgomery County’s push to ban natural gas appliances face strong public opposition. To keep the grid stable, Maryland has already had to delay retirement of its last coal-fired plant, Brandon Shores, from 2025 to 2029, and fast-track two new natural gas units in Harford County.

To keep the state’s climate strategy on solid footing, the authors make three key recommendations:

1. Rank the state’s 21 climate initiatives by cost-effectiveness rather than pursuing all of them at once, and focus funding on the programs that cut the most emissions per dollar spent.
2. Preserve firm baseload generation, including nuclear and natural gas, rather than retiring capacity ahead of proven, reliable sources of energy.
3. Replace blanket mandates, such as natural gas appliance bans, with targeted, means-tested incentives that protect low- and middle-income ratepayers.

The authors conclude that Maryland can remain a national climate leader without sacrificing the affordability and reliability gains that have made it a model for other states, but only by anchoring its strategy in today’s cost and capacity realities rather than a deadline set before the current price pressures emerged.

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @ppi.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

WASHINGTON (July 2, 2026) — The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) this week released a new report, “Michigan’s Climate Goals at a Crossroads,” warning that the state’s 100% clean energy mandate is on a collision course with rising electricity demand and could jeopardize grid reliability and the state’s manufacturing base unless paired with firm, carbon-free power. Authored by Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI, and John Kemp, an internationally recognized expert on energy markets and systems, the report calls on policymakers to shift from rigid fuel-mix mandates to a pragmatic, outcomes-based approach centered on emissions per capita.

Michigan’s Clean Energy Future Plan, signed into law in 2023, mandates 60% renewables by 2030 and 100% clean generation by 2040. But renewables currently supply just 7% to 11% of the state’s power, and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) has warned of insufficient regional generation capacity as soon as 2028. Motor vehicle and parts manufacturing accounts for nearly two-fifths of Michigan’s GDP, making the state especially exposed to reliability disruptions or price spikes from premature retirement of firm gas generation.

The report finds Michigan has cut carbon emissions by two-thirds since 2005, faster than the national average, largely by switching from coal to natural gas. Per-capita emissions now sit at 14 metric tons, slightly below the U.S. average, and total energy spending per person is 11% below the national average. The planned 2026 restart of the Palisades nuclear power plant is expected to add 800 megawatts of firm, carbon-free generation, while the state’s EV mandate of 2 million vehicles by 2030 remains far out of reach, with just under 121,000 registered as of November 2025.

To sustain Michigan’s emissions progress without risking reliability or industrial competitiveness, the report recommends three priorities:

• Maintain natural gas generation for critical reliability rather than retiring efficient plants ahead of adequate replacement capacity
• Leverage firm baseload power, including the Palisades restart and development of small modular reactors, to support continued renewable growth
• Re-evaluate the EV mandate timeline to align with actual adoption while sustaining investment in charging infrastructure

“Michigan has real climate progress to show for the last two decades, but holding onto mandates the grid cannot support is a recipe for blackouts, higher bills, and job losses,” said Brown. “The state has a legislative off-ramp available, and pragmatic policymakers should use it.”

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @ppi.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

WASHINGTON (June 4, 2026) — The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) today released a new report, “The New Mexico Dilemma: Balancing Net-Zero Ambitions with Energy Realities,” warning that the state’s aggressive net-zero timeline could undermine grid reliability and energy affordability unless it is paired with firm, fully-scaled, carbon-free power. Authored by Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI, and John Kemp, an internationally recognized expert on energy markets and systems, the report calls on policymakers to prioritize technology-neutral, outcome-based strategies over fixed net-zero dates.

New Mexico is the nation’s second-largest oil producer and fourth-largest gas producer, and the oil and gas industry is the state’s largest private-sector funder and a major driver of state budget revenues. The state is pursuing a 100% clean grid by 2045 and net-zero emissions by 2050, goals set by executive order in 2019 but never codified by the legislature. Unlike energy-producing peers such as Pennsylvania and Illinois, New Mexico has no nuclear generation and very little hydropower to supply carbon-free baseload, raising the risk that retiring gas generation too quickly could create capacity shortfalls, price spikes, and lost industrial investment.

The report finds the state has cut carbon emissions by 21% since the goals were set, primarily by switching from coal to natural gas, far short of the 45% reduction targeted for 2030. New Mexico also maintains some of the strictest methane rules in the country, requiring operators to capture 98% of natural gas waste and banning routine venting and flaring. Its emissions intensity is half that of Texas.

The authors note that New Mexico is not facing the demand surges and price shocks straining other states. Both grids serving the state, the Southwest Power Pool and WECC-Southwest, hold ample reserve margins expected to remain healthy through 2030. Residential electricity prices have fallen in real terms since 2019 and have risen just 3.7% over the past year, less than half the national average increase.

To protect that advantage, the report recommends three priorities:

1. Adopt technology-neutral, outcome-based policies focused on reducing atmospheric carbon rather than banning specific fuels
2. Invest in clean firm power such as geothermal, battery storage, and advanced nuclear to backstop wind and solar
3. Protect consumer affordability by using the newly established $210 million Community Benefit Fund to keep transition costs from falling on rural and low-income ratepayers

“New Mexico has a rare opportunity to cut emissions without sacrificing reliability or affordability, but only if policy follows the realities on the ground,” said Neel Brown. “Arbitrary deadlines are not a substitute for firm, carbon-free power that is actually built and running.”

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @ppi.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

WASHINGTON (May 12, 2026) — A new report from the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) finds that expanding advanced recycling at existing oil refineries and new standalone facilities nationwide can more than double the U.S. plastic recycling rate from 9% to between 19-23%.

Authored by Stuart Malec, PPI’s Vice President of Public Affairs, “The Waste Diversion Benefits of Expanding Advanced Recycling,” outlines how traditional mechanical recycling is limited due to its inability to recycle ‘flexible plastics’ such as shopping bags and plastic films or plastics contaminated by food or oil residue. Advanced recycling, which uses chemical processes like pyrolysis to break plastics down to the molecular level, can fill in the gap and convert plastic waste into raw materials that can be used to make new products.

“Scaling up advanced recycling efforts will lead to significant environmental and economic benefits,” said Malec. “Increasing the amount of  plastic waste that can be successfully recycled will not only benefit the planet, but will also collectively save communities across the country millions of dollars in their waste disposal budgets.”

Key findings from the report include:

• Short-term deployment of advanced recycling could raise the nationwide plastic recycling rate from 9% to 19% while potentially reaching 23% in the long-term.
• Local municipalities could save between $229.7 million-$327.5 million per year in avoided landfill tipping fees, defined as charges per ton to dispose of waste.
• States with historically low recycling rates can use existing oil refineries to implement advanced recycling technology, raising their landfill diversion rates.

While advanced recycling can curb dangerous environmental effects and benefit local economies, Malec argues that there needs to be a regulatory framework that strengthens the economic incentives to collect plastic waste.

“Clear policy is essential for this innovative technology to achieve its full potential in waste diversion and economic impact,” said Malec. “Without a clear policy framework, more and more plastic waste will continue ending up in landfills instead of being reused in the economy.”

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @ppi.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org

WASHINGTON (April 21, 2026) — A new report from the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) finds that Illinois has built one of the nation’s cleanest and most affordable energy systems, but warns that calendar-driven mandates to phase out natural gas generation could undermine grid reliability, drive up costs, and push investment to neighboring states.

Authored by Neel Brown, Managing Director at PPI, and John Kemp, an internationally recognized energy markets expert, “The Illinois Challenge: Balancing Decarbonization with Economic Reality,” outlines a strategy grounded in reliability, technological maturity, and economic competitiveness.

Illinois has reduced emissions faster than the national average, driven largely by its dominant nuclear fleet and a steady, market-led shift from coal to natural gas. Emissions fell 2.1% annually between 2005 and 2023, compared to 1.2% nationwide, and the state now emits 188 tons of carbon dioxide per $1 million of economic output, more than 10% below the national average and well below every other Midwest state. Household energy spending is nearly 12% below the national average, underscoring the affordability gains that have sustained public support for continued climate progress.

“Illinois’ progress shows that durable emissions reductions come from markets, innovation, and firm low-carbon generation, not from rigid calendar deadlines,” said Brown. “The state already leads the country in clean nuclear power. The next phase requires a pragmatic strategy that protects reliability and affordability while continuing to drive emissions down.”

The authors note that the 2021 Climate and Equitable Jobs Act mandates a full phaseout of natural gas generation by 2045, a timeline that the state’s own 2025 Resource Adequacy Study warns could open significant capacity gaps just as electricity demand is surging. Illinois is currently the country’s fifth-largest electricity generator and a net exporter, but eliminating in-state gas generation is projected to turn it into a net importer reliant on the PJM and Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) regional grids, both of which are expected to face capacity shortfalls by 2030.

Upward pressure on prices is already emerging. Wholesale electricity costs in the PJM region serving northern Illinois surged more than 40% in 2025 amid rapid data center growth, and residential rates jumped 11% in a single year. The authors caution that retiring firm generation before proven replacements are in place will pull energy-intensive industries to higher-emission states such as Indiana and Ohio, exporting both jobs and carbon emissions. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has taken a constructive step by committing to two gigawatts of new nuclear generation and lifting the state’s longstanding moratorium on new reactor construction, reflecting the kind of pragmatic, state-specific policymaking the report recommends.

To navigate this transition, the authors outline three core principles for policymakers:

1. Embrace new nuclear as the foundation of a clean, firm electricity system capable of supporting 24/7 industrial loads and backstopping intermittent renewables.
2. Reform gas transition timelines so infrastructure retirements are aligned with the proven readiness of replacement technologies rather than calendar deadlines.
3. Prioritize grid reliability by heeding regional capacity warnings and avoiding policies that risk blackouts, price spikes, or the loss of in-state generation.

The authors conclude that Illinois’ path to decarbonization must reflect its unique position as the nation’s top nuclear producer and a major electricity exporter. A successful strategy will build on the state’s market-driven progress while avoiding mandates that risk destabilizing the grid, raising costs for households and businesses, or pushing investment across state lines.

Read and download the report here.

Founded in 1989, PPI is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Find an expert and learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org. Follow us at @PPI.

###

Media Contact: Ian O’Keefe – iokeefe@ppionline.org