Reason Foundation

Recent Research and Commentary

Future Storms Like Superstorm Sandy Could Bankrupt States

Some state governments are so far into the insurance business that they could be bankrupted by storm claims

November 5, 2012

Julian Morris, Katie Furtick

Superstorm Sandy killed over 70 people in the U.S., knocked out power for millions up and down the East Coast, flooded the New York Subway, and damaged thousands of homes. The final price tag for the storm's damage could exceed $40 billion, which would make it the most expensive storm to hit the U.S. since Hurricane Katrina. 

Coming as it did, only a year after Hurricane Irene and eight years after Hurricane Ivan, some are asking whether it is part of a trend towards more damaging storms. The answer is yes—we humans are to blame for more damaging storms, but not for the reasons you might think. One of the main culprits is government intervention in insurance markets, which creates perverse incentives to build in danger zones, thereby increasing the threat posed by storms both to property owners and to taxpayers. If Sandy had hit Florida the way it hit New York and New Jersey, it might have bankrupted the state. To reduce the scale of future damage from storms like Sandy, and the threat of fiscal implosion, federal and state governments should get out of the insurance business.

The Environmental Protection Agency and Boiler MACT Regulation

EPA boiler rules should reflect the real world

April 10, 2012

Adam Peshek

Boiler MACT is an example of a regulation that could be amended in simple, appropriate ways to adhere to the spirit of President Obama’s Executive Order 13563. Instead of moving forward with the current proposed rule, EPA should address the issues raised in this brief, including by:

• Basing MACT floor policy decisions on the performance of actual existing boilers, not the performance of a hypothetical boiler that comprises restrictions for individual pollutants currently only achieved in isolation.
• Setting health-based standards per Section 112(d) (4) of the CAA for acid gases that are prevalent and have historically been regulated according to such standards.
• Only reclassifying fuels as “solid waste” (with all the associated additional burdens) if the EPA is able to prove that such a reclassification will result in substantial health benefits. Currently EPA is moving in the opposite direction, placing the burden of proof on industry to petition to remove substances that have historically been used as fuel.

The Facts Behind EPA's Greenhouse Gas Regulations

April 3, 2012, 5:35pm

Adam Peshek

Fracking Cuts Greenhouse Gases

March 19, 2012, 9:49am

Adam Peshek

Germany's Green Energy Policies Are Shutting Down Industry

February 29, 2012, 1:45pm

Adam Peshek

Can Environmental Advocacy Organizations be Good Stewards of the Environment?

February 5, 2012, 6:28pm

Samuel Staley

The willingness of national environmental groups to foresake six-square miles of pristine desert habitat for what will eventually be a minor advance against climate change is a disturbing indicator of how these organizations may be compromising their role as a defenders of the environment.

More »