Some Will Always Have Paris: Withdrawal from the Climate Change Accord May Not Reduce the Heat on the Health Care Industry

Jun 19, 2017

Reading Time : 4 min

Despite these actions and pronouncements, many states and cities continue to press forward with, if not expand, efforts to reduce significantly the carbon footprint within their jurisdictions. One day after the President’s announcement, the Governors of New York, California and Washington established the United States Climate Alliance, a coalition of states committed to upholding the Paris Agreement, reducing emissions by 26-28 percent from 2005 levels by 2025 and meeting or exceeding the targets established in the federal Clean Power Plan.4 Building on a Memorandum of Understanding endorsed by eight U.S. cities and 10 states,5 New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s most recent State Energy Plan requires a reduction in state emissions of 40 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050 (the “80 by 50” pledge). New York City separately signed on to the 80 by 50 pledge and, in the wake of President Trump’s Paris Agreement announcement, MayorDiBlasio joined the Climate Mayors Coalition, committing to “adopt, honor, and uphold the commitments to the goals enshrined in the Paris Agreement.”6

To achieve these emissions reductions goals, states and cities appear likely to focus on large physical footprints like health care facilities that use significant amounts of energy (and the universities that often house them and other large laboratories). Buildings are natural targets for GHG reduction efforts due to the high energy demands associated with lighting; heating and air conditioning; office equipment and data systems; refrigeration equipment; and other commercial and consumer electronics products. Within the building category, hospitals are unusually heavy power users due to their large envelope; 24-hour operation; the need for precise environmental controls; the highly specialized, often energy-intensive medical equipment and information technology and data storage systems used; and the need for reliable backup, if not primary, power generation.7 Hospital facilities account for less than 1 percent of all commercial buildings, but account for over 5 percent of commercial building energy consumption.8 A 2016 Yale/Northeastern study found hospitals to be the second most energy-intensive commercial buildings in the country.9 Indeed, the health care sector is responsible for roughly 10 percent of the nation’s GHG emissions, according to the study.10

Many hospitals have recognized the need to reduce energy use and associated direct and indirect GHGs, if only for the cost saving associated with reduced energy consumption. In New York City, 10 of the largest hospitals joined the NYC Carbon Challenge in 2009, striving to reduce facility-based emissions by between 30 and 50 percent by 2025.11 Boston-area hospitals cut their energy GHG emissions by 29 percent between 2011 and 2015, and are on track to reduce total emissions by 33 percent by 2020.12 These successes demonstrate that emission reductions are possible, but they are also likely to increase the pressure on the broader health care sector as states and municipalities begin to look past voluntary efforts to regulatory compliance programs to drive down emissions.

Cities and states committing to Paris-like obligations appear likely to look to their health care and university constituents to squeeze out even greater building efficiency through new building design, improved operations and purchasing, and innovations. Some regulators may look to incentivize this transition by promoting investments in energy efficiency and cleaner energy using tax incentives, grants, low-interest loans and other financing mechanisms. Some regulators may look to market-based systems, like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in operation for electric power plants, to reward early actors and punish laggards. Some governments may look to traditional command-and-control regulations to drive emissions reductions within the industry. Hospitals and universities, already on the front lines of this fight, may want to get ahead of their regulators to help shape those strategies in order to avoid being reshaped by them.


1 White House, Executive Order 13783: Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth (March 28, 2017).

2 EPA, Review of the Clean Power Plan; Announcement of Review, 82 Fed. Reg. 16329 (April 4, 2017).

3 Bureau of Land Management, Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation: Notification; Postponement of Compliance Dates (announced June 15, 2017).

4 New York State, New York Governor Cuomo, California Governor Brown, and Washington Governor Inslee Announce Formation of United States Climate Alliance (June 1, 2016).

5 Under2 Coalition, Memorandum of Understanding on Subnational Global Climate Leadership (2015).

6 Climate Mayors Coalition, 305 US Climate Mayors commit to adopt, honor and uphold Paris Climate Agreement goals: Statement from the Climate Mayors in Response to President Trump’s Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement (June 1, 2017).

7 Department of Energy, Energy Information Agency, Energy Characteristics and Energy Consumed in Large Hospital Buildings in the United States in 2007, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) (August 17, 2012) (“CBECS Report”).

8 CBECS Report, https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/reports/2007/large-hospital.php.

9 Eckelman MJ, Sherman J, Environmental Impacts of the U.S. Healthcare System and Effects on Public Health, PLoS One, DOI:10.1371 (June 9, 2016).

10 Id.

11 NYC Mayor’s Office of Sustainability, Green Buildings & Energy Efficiency: The New York City Carbon Challenge (2017), http://www.nyc.gov/html/gbee/html/challenge/nyc-carbon-challenge.shtml.

12 Health Care Without Harm, Metropolitan Boston Health Care Energy & Greenhouse Gas Profile: 2011 through 2015, and 2020 Projection (May 2017).

Share This Insight

Categories

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

December 5, 2024

On November 27, 2024, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) issued Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC,1 an order that sets aside, in part, the Commission’s prior authorization of the CP2 LNG Terminal and CP Express Pipeline Project (collectively, the CP2 Project) under sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). In anticipation of future appellate challenges to its authorization of the CP2 Project, FERC ordered the initiation of a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to assess the CP2 Project’s contribution to cumulative air impacts for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5). Accordingly, FERC stated that it would not allow construction to commence on the CP2 Project’s proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal and related feed gas pipeline until the SEIS process concluded and a subsequent order was issued. Concurrent with its Venture Global order, FERC issued a projected schedule for the NEPA process that does not conclude until July 24, 2025. Construction on the CP2 Project had been expected to be imminent, with the project sponsor seeking a partial authorization to proceed with construction only hours prior to Venture Global’s issuance.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

December 5, 2024

On November 27, 2024, in Venture Global, CP2 LNG, LLC,1 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC or Commission) explicitly overruled precedent set in Northern Natural Gas Co.,2 a 2021 decision in which FERC made an affirmative finding that an interstate natural gas pipeline project it was certificating under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) would not make a “significant” contribution to global climate change. Northern Natural is the only FERC decision in which a so-called significance determination was made with respect to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) arising from a FERC-regulated natural gas infrastructure project. In Venture Global, FERC rejected arguments that it needed to follow Northern Natural and assess the significance of GHG emissions in all NGA certificate proceedings to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies, including FERC, that perform “major federal actions,” which include issuing NGA section 7 certificates, to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) if the action will “significantly affect[] the quality of the human environment.”3 FERC has been under pressure to fully explain why it has chosen not to apply Northern Natural’s significance analysis in subsequent cases, and that issue is currently before FERC on remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) in Healthy Gulf et al. v. FERC, which reviewed FERC’s approval of a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal under NGA section 3.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

December 4, 2024

On November 21, 2024, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) issued Order No. 1920-A1 addressing requests for rehearing and clarification of FERC’s landmark final rule on transmission planning and cost allocation issued in May 2024. While the Commission largely affirmed the final rule, the order grants rehearing of some of the more controversial aspects of Order No. 1920.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

August 7, 2024

*Thank you to JaKell Larson, 2024 Akin Summer Associate, for her valuable collaboration on this article.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 31, 2024

Interstate oil, liquid and refined products pipelines regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will soon be able to raise their transportation rates (provided they were set using FERC’s popular Index rate methodology) in the wake of a significant new decision by the District of Columbia Circuit (the D.C. Circuit) in Liquid Energy Pipeline Association v. FERC (LEPA).

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 29, 2024

On Wednesday, July 24, 2024, the U.S. House of Representative Committee on Energy and Commerce held a Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security hearing to review the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Request. Members of the Subcommittee had the opportunity to hear testimony from all five Commissioners, including FERC Chairman Willie Phillips and Commissioner Mark Christie, as well as the three recently confirmed commissioners, David Rosner, Lindsay See and Judy Chang. In addition to their prepared remarks, the five commissioners answered questions on FERC’s mandate to provide affordable and reliable electricity and natural gas services nationwide, while also ensuring it fulfills its primary mission of maintaining just and reasonable rates.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 29, 2024

On July 9, 2024, the U.S. Court of the Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) erred in ordering refunds for certain bilateral spot market transactions in the Western Energy Coordinating Council (WECC) region that exceeded the $1,000/megawatt-hour (MWh) “soft” price cap for such sales.1 Finding FERC failed to conduct a “Mobile-Sierra public-interest analysis” before “altering” those contracts by ordering refunds, the court vacated FERC’s orders and remanded the case to FERC for further proceedings.2

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 8, 2024

On June 28, 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which for 40 years required court deference to reasonable agency interpretations of federal statutes in certain circumstances, even when the reviewing court would read the statute differently. The Court ended “Chevron deference” and held that courts “must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.” In doing so, the Court upended a longstanding principle of administrative law that is likely to make agency decisions more susceptible to challenge in the courts.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.