Kelly Sims Gallagher

AP Photo

December 2009

"Key Opportunities for U.S.-China Cooperation on Coal and CCS"

Paper

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

This paper outlines the current situation regarding advanced coal and carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the United States and China. The strategic interest in cooperation on coal and CCS is explored, and then three options for collaboration are identified and discussed. None of the options are mutually exclusive. Remaining questions for discussion are provided at the end.

November 2009

"Breaking the Climate Impasse with China: A Global Solution"

Discussion Paper

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

A "deal" is proposed in this paper, whereby all major-emitting countries, including the United States and China, agree to reduce emissions through implementation of significant, mutually agreeable, domestic emission-reduction policies. To resolve the competitiveness and equity concerns, a proposed Carbon Mitigation Fund would be created. This proposed fund is contrasted with other existing and proposed mitigation funds and finance mechanisms. 

June 25, 2009

DOE FY 2010 Budget Request and Recovery Act Funding for Energy Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment: Analysis and Recommendations

Report

By Laura Diaz Anadon, Associate Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Director, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group; Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group and Matthew Bunn, Associate Professor of Public Policy; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom

A new analysis of energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment (ERD3) funding in the Obama administration's FY2010 budget and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 finds that the total available for energy research development and demonstration alone and ERD3 in FY2010 would double and increase by two-thirds, respectively, compared to FY2009 (based on certain assumptions). These substantial funding increases—coupled with a range of institutional innovations the administration is implementing and movement toward putting a price on carbon emissions—will help accelerate innovation for a broad range of energy technologies. This report analyzes DOE's budget request for ERD3 and the Recovery Act and makes recommendations for further action by Congress and the administration.

June 12, 2009

DOE Budget Authority for Energy Research, Development, & Demonstration Database

Fact Sheet

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group and Laura Diaz Anadon, Associate Director, Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; Director, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group; Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy

This document contains June 2009 updates to our database on U.S. government investments in energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment (ERD3) through the Department of Energy.  The update includes funding for ERD3 from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  The database, in Microsoft Excel format, tracks DOE appropriations from FY 1978–2009 and the FY 2010 budget request.  It also includes several charts.

Photo by Sharon Wilke

June 3, 2009

A Joint Workshop on Promoting the Development and Deployment of IGCC/Co-Production/CCS Technologies in China and the United States

Report

By Lifeng Zhao, Former Research Fellow, Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group/Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program, 2006-2008, Yunhan Xiao and Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

The workshop examined issues surrounding Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) coal plants, which turn coal into gas and remove impurities before the coal is combusted, and the related carbon capture and sequestration, in which the carbon dioxide emissions are captured and stored underground to avoid releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Though promising, advanced coal technologies face steep financial and legal hurdles, and almost certainly will need sustained support from governments to develop the technology and move it to a point where its costs are low enough for widespread use.

May 28, 2009

"Harvard's Gallagher Discusses New Report on Energy Policy Challenges Facing U.S."

Media Interview Transcripts

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

Will the Obama administration's plan for vehicle emissions standards and auto efficiency affect consumer behavior? During today's OnPoint, Kelly Sims Gallagher, director of the Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group at the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center, gives her take on the administration's recent auto emissions announcement and whether it will have any significant effects on the environment. Gallagher, editor of the new report, "Acting in Time on Energy Policy," explains why she believes Congress should consider a variable tax on the price of oil as part of the United States' energy policy.

May 20, 2009

"Acting in Time on Energy Policy"

Policy Brief

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

This policy brief outlines urgent priorities for U.S. energy policy at the dawn of the Obama administration, and recommends specific steps that the U.S. government should take to address the numerous energy-related challenges facing the United States. It is based on the book, Acting in Time on Energy Policy (Brookings 2009), edited by Kelly Sims Gallagher, director of the Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group at the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center.

We concentrate on six topics: climate change policy, carbon capture and storage policy, oil security policy, energy-technology innovation policy, electricity market structure, and infrastructure policy. The United States cannot afford to wait any longer to enact long-term policies on these topics. In fact, acting early is clearly in the longer-term interest of the United States.

May 2009

"Acting in Time on Climate Change"

Book Chapter

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

"This chapter expolres a number of related questions: How much time do we have to act? How much climate change is virtually inevitable? What are the consequences of procrastination? And finally, what is the appropriate role for governments wishing to act in time to reduce the threat of climate change? In addition, the reality of current emissions and policy responses is explored in some detail for the two biggest emitters in the world: the United States and China."

May 2009

"Acting in Time on Energy Policy"

Book Chapter

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

"The book's title—Acting in Time—refers to the persistent problem in U.S. energy policy that typically just enough is done to satisfy the short-term political imperatives, but not enough is done to actually solve the underlying problems themselves. As a result, many of the fundamental economic, environmental, and security-related challenges arising from patterns of U.S. energy production and consumption have become more intractable. Some now approach a point of crisis."

May 2009

Acting in Time on Energy Policy

Book

By Kelly Sims Gallagher, Senior Associate, Energy Technology Innovation Policy research group

Energy policy is on everyone's mind these days. The U.S. presidential campaign focused on energy independence and exploration ("Drill, baby, drill!"), climate change, alternative fuels, even nuclear energy. But there is a serious problem endemic to America's energy challenges. Policymakers tend to do just enough to satisfy political demands but not enough to solve the real problems, and they wait too long to act. The resulting policies are overly reactive, enacted once damage is already done, and they are too often incomplete, incoherent, and ineffectual. Given the gravity of current economic, geopolitical, and environmental concerns, this is more unacceptable than ever. This important volume details this problem, making clear the unfortunate results of such short-sighted thinking, and it proposes measures to overcome this counterproductive tendency.