For the first time, the White House has directed agencies to calculate the climate consequences — in dollars — of every proposed energy project. The governmentwide use of a metric known as the social cost of carbon will attach a hefty price tag to every metric ton of carbon pollution associated with a project. A high-polluting pipeline or oil rig could consequently be deemed more costly than beneficial in an agency’s environmental review. But the metric could also have an unintended consequence: discounting the preservation of forests, marshes or even a scenic view, writes POLITICO’s E&E News reporter Jean Chemnick. That’s because there is no comparable calculation for valuing other social and environmental goods, like waterways and other ecosystems, despite the benefits they provide. Forests absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide, promote wildlife habitat and provide opportunities for recreation, among others. Those benefits could get overshadowed by projects with more seemingly tangible effects on emissions under the administration’s new guidance for using the social cost of carbon. For example, a transmission line that carries solar and wind power from rural areas to urban centers, slashing carbon pollution from the grid, could provide benefits to the tune of millions under an agency’s environmental review. But the wildlife refuge it crossed to reach the urban center wouldn’t have the same monetized value. There are some federal efforts afoot aimed at assigning a dollar amount to environmental goods like preserving ecosystems. But those are typically cruder and more preliminary than the social cost of carbon, which is the product of more than a decade of analysis using peer-reviewed models. Huge caveat: The results of an agency’s environmental impact evaluation don’t dictate its decisions one way or the other. But the potential carbon savings of a renewable energy project could be hard to ignore, even if it disrupts an ecosystem. The Biden administration is advancing a new social cost of carbon that raises the price of planet-warming pollution to $190 per ton, up from $51. The White House has also told agencies to consider the indirect and cumulative pollution associated with a proposed project, not only on-site emissions. Add that to the updated social cost metric, and the premium associated with avoiding greenhouse gases could be astronomical.
| 
