IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-06-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Taking up the Slack: Lessons from a Cap-and-Trade Program in Chicago

Author

Listed:
  • Evans, David A.

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Kruger, Joseph A.

Abstract

The Emissions Reduction Market System (ERMS), an emissions-trading program for volatile organic materials (VOMs) in Chicago, Illinois, has been characterized by emissions significantly below the annual allocation of emission allowances, allowance prices much lower than predicted, limited trading, and emission allowances that expire unused. Essentially, it appears that a fundamental prerequisite for a tradable allowance program is missing—there is no scarcity of allowances. We evaluate a variety of hypotheses that may explain why the ERMS cap does not appear to be affecting abatement behavior and identify three that contributed to the lack of scarcity in the ERMS program: (1) a baseline process that inflated the cap; (2) hazardous air pollutant regulations that contributed to VOM reductions at some sources; and (3) numerous facility shutdowns. We conclude that the ERMS experience illustrates the inherent unpredictability of economic, regulatory, and other factors when setting an emissions target; a conclusion that resonates with the recent experience of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. This argues for gathering reliable emissions data, developing sophisticated emissions projections, and making transparent assumptions about the impacts of other policies and regulations during the program planning and design phase. However, even with all these attributes, it is still difficult to anticipate every possible outcome. Thus, it is desirable to have robust mechanisms to address the uncertainties of emissions-trading markets and to make midcourse corrections if necessary. Finally, we offer some comments on how to think about the results of ERMS versus a hypothetical command and control program that might have been designed to reach the same environmental outcome.

Suggested Citation

  • Evans, David A. & Kruger, Joseph A., 2006. "Taking up the Slack: Lessons from a Cap-and-Trade Program in Chicago," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-36, Resources for the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-06-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-06-36.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Foster, Vivien & Hahn, Robert W, 1995. "Designing More Efficient Markets: Lessons from Los Angeles Smog Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(1), pages 19-48, April.
    2. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    3. Cameron Hepburn & Michael Grubb & Karsten Neuhoff & Felix Matthes & Maximilien Tse, 2006. "Auctioning of EU ETS phase II allowances: how and why?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 137-160, January.
    4. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Krupnick, Alan & Evans, David & Toth, Russell, 2005. "Economics of Pollution Trading for SO2 and NOx," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-05, Resources for the Future.
    5. Montero, Juan-Pablo & Sanchez, Jose Miguel & Katz, Ricardo, 2002. "A Market-Based Environmental Policy Experiment in Chile," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 267-287, April.
    6. Henderson, J Vernon, 1996. "Effects of Air Quality Regulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 789-813, September.
    7. Michael Grubb & Karsten Neuhoff, 2006. "Allocation and competitiveness in the EU emissions trading scheme: policy overview," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 7-30, January.
    8. Ellerman,A. Denny & Joskow,Paul L. & Schmalensee,Richard & Montero,Juan-Pablo & Bailey,Elizabeth M., 2005. "Markets for Clean Air," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521023894, October.
      • Ellerman,A. Denny & Joskow,Paul L. & Schmalensee,Richard & Montero,Juan-Pablo & Bailey,Elizabeth M., 2000. "Markets for Clean Air," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521660839, October.
    9. David Weil & Archon Fung & Mary Graham & Elena Fagotto, 2006. "The effectiveness of regulatory disclosure policies," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(1), pages 155-181.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiona Haines, 2013. "Three Risks, One Solution? Exploring the Relationship between Risk and Regulation," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 649(1), pages 35-51, September.
    2. Richard Kosobud & Joshua Linn & Houston Stokes & Carol Tallarico, 2008. "Regulatory conflict in the Chicago VOC control program," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(4), pages 561-579.
    3. Gautier Kohler & Benoit Lefèvre;, 2011. "A comparative analysis of city-based emission trading schemes: key design and management factors for environmental cost effectiveness," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 35(2/3/4), pages 215-241.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stavins, Robert, 2003. "Market-Based Environmental Policies: What Can We Learn from U.S. Experience and Related Research?," Working Paper Series rwp03-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Kruger, Joseph & Oates, Wallace E. & Pizer, William A., 2007. "Decentralization in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and Lessons for Global Policy," RFF Working Paper Series dp-07-02, Resources for the Future.
    3. Fritz Rahmeyer, 2007. "Europäischer Handel mit Treibhausgasemissionszertifikaten und seine Umsetzung in das deutsche Umweltrecht," Discussion Paper Series 296, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    4. Burtraw, Dallas & Evans, David A., 2009. "Tradable rights to emit air pollution," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(1), pages 1-26.
    5. Lin, Boqiang & Jiang, Zhujun & Zhang, Peng, 2011. "Allocation of sulphur dioxide allowance – An analysis based on a survey of power plants in Fujian province in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 3120-3129.
    6. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    7. Wood, Peter John & Jotzo, Frank, 2011. "Price floors for emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1746-1753, March.
    8. Beat Hintermann, 2011. "Market Power, Permit Allocation and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 327-349, July.
    9. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Can an Effective Global Climate Treaty be Based on Sound Science, Rational Economics, and Pragmatic Politics?," Working Paper Series rwp04-020, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    10. Weber, Thomas A. & Neuhoff, Karsten, 2010. "Carbon markets and technological innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 115-132, September.
    11. Shobe, William & Palmer, Karen & Myers, Erica & Holt, Charles & Goeree, Jacob & Burtraw, Dallas, 2010. "An Experimental Analysis of Auctioning Emission Allowances Under a Loose Cap," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 162-175, April.
    12. Emilie Alberola & Julien Chevallier, 2009. "European Carbon Prices and Banking Restrictions: Evidence from Phase I (2005-2007)," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 51-80.
    13. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    14. Sato, Misato & Rafaty, Ryan & Calel, Raphael & Grubb, Michael, 2022. "Allocation, allocation, allocation! The political economy of the development of the European Union Emissions Trading System," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115431, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Kahn, Danny, 2010. "A symmetric safety valve," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 4921-4932, September.
    16. Dickson, Alex & MacKenzie, Ian A., 2018. "Strategic trade in pollution permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 94-113.
    17. Hintermann, Beat, 2010. "Allowance price drivers in the first phase of the EU ETS," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 43-56, January.
    18. Phillia Restiani & Regina Betz, 2010. "A Theoretical Model of Optimal Compliance Decisions under Different Penalty Designs in Emissions Trading Markets," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1086, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    19. David Anthoff & Robert Hahn, 2010. "Government failure and market failure: on the inefficiency of environmental and energy policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 197-224, Summer.
    20. Lata Gangadharan & Rachel Croson & Alex Farrell, 2013. "Investment decisions and emissions reductions: results from experiments in emissions trading," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 8, pages 233-264, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    emissions-trading; ERMS; European Union; climate change;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-06-36. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.