IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-07-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

U.S. Climate Policy Developments

Author

Listed:
  • Toshi Arimura

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Dallas Burtraw
  • Alan J. Krupnick
  • Karen L. Palmer

Abstract

This paper outlines recent developments in U.S. climate policies. Although the United States does not participate in the Kyoto Mechanism, a number of climate policies are being implemented at state level as well as at the federal level. First, we report and compare the federal cap and trade proposals in the 110th Congress. Then, the paper illustrates the current situations of state level climate policies, such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in the northeastern states or AB32 in California. We analyze these proposals from the viewpoint of technology policies and impacts on international markets. It is found that technology policies play important roles in the cap and trade proposals and that there is a great expectation for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. In terms of the impacts on international markets, several federal proposals as well as regional programs permit trading in international markets. As emission targets become more stringent in the future, U.S. GHG emitters are more likely to interact with these markets. Thus, despite the lack of U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol, U.S. markets will be linked to foreign markets, at least, in an indirect way.

Suggested Citation

  • Toshi Arimura & Dallas Burtraw & Alan J. Krupnick & Karen L. Palmer, 2007. "U.S. Climate Policy Developments," RFF Working Paper Series dp-07-45, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-07-45
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-07-45.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sperling, Daniel & Farrell, Alexander, 2007. "A Low-Carbon Fuel Standard for California, Part 2: Policy Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5hv693r2, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Farrell, Alexander E. & Sperling, Dan, 2007. "A Low-Carbon Fuel Standard for California, Part 2: Policy Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8ng2h3x7, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    3. Farrell, Alexander & Sperling, Daniel, 2007. "A Low-Carbon Fuel Standard for California, Part 2: Policy Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8xv635dc, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    4. Farrell, Alexander & Sperling, Daniel, 2007. "A Low-Carbon Fuel Standard for California, Part 1: Technical Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5245b5kx, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    5. Sergey Paltsev & John M. Reilly & Henry D. Jacoby & Angelo C. Gurgel & Gilbert E. Metcalf & Andrei P. Sokolov & Jennifer F. Holak, 2007. "Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals," NBER Working Papers 13176, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen L. & Kahn, Danny, 2005. "Allocation of CO2 Emissions Allowances in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade Program," Discussion Papers 10650, Resources for the Future.
    7. Hanemann, W. Michael, 2007. "How California Came to Pass AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1vb0j4d6, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    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. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer, 2009. "Issues in Designing U.S. Climate Change Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 179-210.
    2. Oren Ahoobim & Nick Burger & Charles Kolstad & Shaun McRae & Corbett Grainger, 2008. "Beyond the Market Advisory Committee: Proceedings from a Workshop Held at Stanford University," Discussion Papers 07-045, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    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. Yeh, Sonia & Sperling, Daniel, 2010. "Low carbon fuel standards: Implementation scenarios and challenges," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6955-6965, November.
    2. Dallas Burtraw, 2008. "Regulating CO 2 in electricity markets: sources or consumers?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(6), pages 588-606, November.
    3. Huseynov, Samir & Palma, Marco A., 2018. "Does California’s LCFS Reduce CO2 Emissions?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274200, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Tittmann, P.W. & Parker, N.C. & Hart, Q.J. & Jenkins, B.M., 2010. "A spatially explicit techno-economic model of bioenergy and biofuels production in California," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 715-728.
    5. Yongxi (Eric) Huang & Yueyue Fan & Chien-Wei Chen, 2014. "An Integrated Biofuel Supply Chain to Cope with Feedstock Seasonality and Uncertainty," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 540-554, November.
    6. Axsen, Jonn & Wolinetz, Michael, 2023. "What does a low-carbon fuel standard contribute to a policy mix? An interdisciplinary review of evidence and research gaps," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 54-63.
    7. Fan, Yueyue & Huang, Yongxi & Chen, Chien-Wei, 2012. "Multistage Infrastructure System Design: An Integrated Biofuel Supply Chain against Feedstock Seasonality and Uncertainty," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt9g8413m5, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    8. Fischer, Carolyn & Salant, Stephen W., 2017. "Balancing the carbon budget for oil: The distributive effects of alternative policies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 191-215.
    9. Rubin, Jonathan & Leiby, Paul N., 2013. "Tradable credits system design and cost savings for a national low carbon fuel standard for road transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 16-28.
    10. Gang Tian & Jian Shi & Licheng Sun & Xingle Long & Benhai Guo, 2017. "Dynamic changes in the energy–carbon performance of Chinese transportation sector: a meta-frontier non-radial directional distance function approach," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 89(2), pages 585-607, November.
    11. Milazzo, M.F. & Spina, F. & Cavallaro, S. & Bart, J.C.J., 2013. "Sustainable soy biodiesel," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 806-852.
    12. Wang, Guihua, 2008. "Lifecycle Analysis of Air Quality Impacts of Hydrogen and Gasoline Transportation Fuel Pathways," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt41x6t130, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    13. Derek Lemoine, 2017. "Escape from Third-Best: Rating Emissions for Intensity Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 789-821, August.
    14. Kammen, Daniel M. & Farrell, Alexander E & Plevin, Richard J & Jones, Andrew & Nemet, Gregory F & Delucchi, Mark, 2008. "Energy and Greenhouse Gas Impacts of Biofuels: A Framework for Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5qw5g6q2, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    15. Yeh, Sonia & Witcover, Julie & Lade, Gabriel E. & Sperling, Daniel, 2016. "A review of low carbon fuel policies: Principles, program status and future directions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 220-234.
    16. Holland, Stephen P., 2012. "Emissions taxes versus intensity standards: Second-best environmental policies with incomplete regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 375-387.
    17. Burtraw, Dallas, 2007. "State Efforts to Cap the Commons: Regulating Sources or Consumers?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-07-49, Resources for the Future.
    18. Rode, Philipp & Floater, Graham & Thomopoulos, Nikolas & Docherty, James & Schwinger, Peter & Mahendra, Anjali & Fang, Wanli, 2014. "Accessibility in cities: transport and urban form," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60477, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Yeh, Sonia & Lutsey, Nicholas P. & Parker, Nathan C., 2009. "Assessment of Technologies for Compliance with the Low Carbon Fuel Standard," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5bg831jc, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    20. Hester, Annette & Lawrence, Leah, 2010. "A sub-national public-private strategic alliance for innovation and export development: the case of the Canadian province of Alberta's oil sands," Documentos de Proyectos 3760, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    United States; climate policy; cap and trade; the Kyoto mechanism; technology policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • 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-07-45. 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.