Our assessment of the effectiveness of the two laws
The IRA and the BIL have set in motion substantial efforts towards energy transition in the US. With these laws, the US has shown a preference for an incentive-based approach rather than disincentives like carbon taxes and mandates for implementation of clean energy projects. It thus runs a risk of delayed phase-out of high emission sources.
The IRA’s financial outlay is not limited by a predefined cap – while the initial estimate of spending in 2022 was USD 400 bn., it has now ballooned to USD 870 bn as per Figure 2. Such an approach could lead to a significant increase in national debt. While the BIL focuses on a host of infrastructure developments, critics feel that certain provisions of the law promote fossil fuel use – for instance, fast-tracking permits and removing loan caps on natural gas projects in Alaska, promotion of CCUS which may indirectly prolong the life of fossil fuel plants, and production of hydrogen from natural gas. The duty to utilize the funds provided by the IRA is progressively being handed over to subnational entities, including states, cities, businesses, and non-profit organizations. As more entities get involved, the process tends to become less efficient.
Thus, there are a multitude of critical success factors involved in the energy transition with many interplays between them. Thus, investors should ensure the viability of projects on a first-principal basis and find suitable mitigation measures for addressing gaps, if any. FutureBridge helps its clients identify the market drivers, assess techno-commercial viability of business ideas and suitable trigger points for execution for a 1-to-25-year time horizon.