Overselling BIL and IRA
44 Pages Posted: 28 Nov 2023 Last revised: 31 Oct 2024
Date Written: October 30, 2023
Abstract
This Article argues that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are less likely to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions than typically believed, and that a misconceived narrative of spending effectiveness is now threatening to undercut the perceived urgency of further legislative action on climate change in the United States. With the passage of BIL and IRA, the United States has committed to a climate law strategy predominated by public spending in lieu of regulatory mandates. Recent studies, including studies produced by the U.S. federal government, predict that this spending will push U.S. annual greenhouse gas emissions down to as much as 45% below 2005 levels by 2030. But these predictions are based on modeling that has a very poor predictive track record and assumes away many of the real-world constraints that BIL and IRA’s spending programs face. This Article undertakes an in-depth examination of one such model, explores how modeling has influenced discourse around BIL and IRA, demonstrates that this discourse has failed to acknowledge known barriers to BIL and IRA’s effectiveness, and posits that the resulting narrative of effectiveness is impacting the future outlook of further climate legislation in the United States. The Article proposes that greater care be taken in the communication of energy-economic modeling results, that BIL and IRA should be evaluated only as elements of a larger climate policy portfolio encompassing constraining as well as spending policies, and that BIL and IRA do not obviate the need to continue pushing for further national climate legislation in the United States.
Keywords: Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Inflation Reduction Act, Energy Economic Modeling, Prediction
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation