Tag Archives: tailoring rule

AB 32, RGGI, and Climate Change: The National Context of State Policies for a Global Commons Problem

Posted on October 1, 2010 by Robert Stavins

Why should anyone be interested in the national context of a state policy? In the case of California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), the answer flows directly from the very nature of the problem — global climate change, the … Continue reading >

Posted in Climate Change Policy, Energy Economics, Energy Policy, Environmental Economics, Environmental Policy, Natural Resource Policy, Positive Political Economy | Tagged AB 32, Best Available Control Technology, CAFE standards, cap-and-trade, carbon tax, carbon-pricing policy, cost-effectiveness, Dormant Commerce Clause, endangerment finding, environmental politics, free rider problem, global climate policy, Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, Lawrence Goulder, linkage of cap-and-trade systems, market failure, market-based environmental policies, Massachusetts v EPA, mobile source standards, National Bureau of Economic Research, new source performance standards, New Source Review, NIMBY, Obama Administration, Pavley standards, price collar, principal-agent problem, public goods, public nuisance, regulation, revenue-neutral taxes, RGGI, safety-valve, Stanford University, sulfur dioxide, Supreme Court, tailoring rule, technological change, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Waxman-Markey legislation, Western Climate Initiative | Leave a comment

The Real Options for U.S. Climate Policy

Posted on June 23, 2010 by Robert Stavins

The time has not yet come to throw in the towel regarding the possible enactment in 2010 of meaningful economy-wide climate change policy (such as that found in the Waxman-Markey legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June, … Continue reading >

Posted in Climate Change Policy, Economic Stimulus Policy, Energy Economics, Energy Policy, Environmental Economics, Environmental Policy, Natural Resource Economics, Natural Resource Policy, Positive Political Economy | Tagged Assembly Bill 32, baseline-and-credit system, Best Available Control Technology, biofuels, Cap-and-Dividend, cap-and-trade, carbon capture and storage (CCS), carbon pricing, carbon tax, Clean Air Act, Clean Development Mechanism, Clean Energy Standards, CLEAR Act, cost-effectiveness, distortionary taxes, Dormant Commerce Clause, economic stimulus package, efficiency, emission-reduction-credit system, endangerment finding, energy security, Environment and Natural Resources Committee, Environmental Law Institute, environmental politics, ethanol, G20, global climate policy, Gulf oil spill, import allowance requirement, International Energy Agency, Kerry-Lieberman legislation, leaded gasoline phasedown, linkage of cap-and-trade systems, market failure, market-based environmental policies, Massachusetts v EPA, mobile source standards, National Bureau of Economic Research, new source performance standards, New Source Review, NIMBY, Obama Administration, oil import fee, output-based updating allocation, populism, President Barack Obama, President George H.W. Bush, price collar, principal-agent problem, Professor Lawrence Goulder, public nuisance litigation, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, regulation, Renewable Portfolio Standard, revenue-neutral taxes, sectoral approaches, Senator Jay Rockefeller, Senator Jeff Bingaman, Senator Lamar Alexander, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Senator Maria Cantwell, Senator Richard Lugar, Senator Susan Collins, Senator Thomas Carper, stepwise regulation, subsidies, sulfur dioxide, tailoring rule, technological change, technological diffusion, technology innovation, three-pollutant legislation, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Waxman-Markey legislation, Western Climate Initiative, World Resources Institute | 8 Comments

Any Hope for Meaningful U.S. Climate Policy? You be the Judge.

Posted on February 8, 2010 by Robert Stavins

The current conventional wisdom – broadly echoed by the news media and the blogosphere – is that comprehensive, economy-wide CO2 cap-and-trade legislation is dead in the current U.S. Congress, and perhaps for the next several years. Watch out for conventional … Continue reading >

Posted in Climate Change Policy, Energy Policy, Environmental Economics, Environmental Policy | Tagged allowance allocation, Cap-and-Dividend, cap-and-trade, Clean Air Act, CLEAR Act, Coal, Congressional Review Act of 1996, Contract with America, conventional wisdom, Copenhagen, Copenhagen Accord, cost-effectiveness, criteria air pollutants, disapproval resolution, distortionary taxes, distributional analysis, distributional equity, endangerment finding, environmental politics, externalities, financial regulatory reform, global climate policy, health care policy, import allowance requirement, market failure, market-based environmental policies, Massachusetts v EPA, Obama Administration, political economy, populism, President Barack Obama, regulation, Renewable Portfolio Standard, revenue-neutral taxes, RGGI, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Senator Maria Cantwell, Senator Susan Collins, Sky Trust, tailoring rule, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, U.S. Supreme Court, upstream, Waxman-Markey legislation, White House | 14 Comments

Tag Archives: tailoring rule

AB 32, RGGI, and Climate Change: The National Context of State Policies for a Global Commons Problem

The Real Options for U.S. Climate Policy

Any Hope for Meaningful U.S. Climate Policy? You be the Judge.

About the Author

Disclaimer

Important Links:

Email Updates

Categories

Other Blogs:

Archives