California releases global warming plan

By SAMANTHA YOUNG

Continued from previous post...One of the most contentious elements of the plan is the reliance on a cap-and-trade program to help power plants, oil and gas refiners, manufacturers and other major polluters lower their output of carbon emissions. The idea is to allow businesses that cannot cut their emissions because of cost or technical hurdles to buy emission credits from companies that have achieved cleaner emissions.

While a trading scheme is embraced by many businesses and environmental groups as a cost-effective way of gaining emission reductions, some Democrats and health advocates are concerned businesses could shirk their responsibilities and continue polluting the air.

In the board's latest proposal, regulators suggested businesses could get some emission credits for free, but polluters eventually would have to buy into the market. They also suggested they would limit so-called offset projects—such as planting trees—that companies could undertake to achieve their obligations.

Regulators said final decisions would be made as they design the market program in the next few years, disappointing some environmentalists who had hoped they would finally address many of the difficult and most contentious rules for implementing the plan.

"The features of a well designed cap and trade program are pretty clear, and they could have been much more specific in their recommendations," said Chris Busch, a climate economist at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols explained that regulators first wanted to think through the implications a market would have on the industries asked to cut back their emissions before addressing the specifics.

"We're facing the reality at the moment of a very uncertain business climate," Nichols said.Continued...


I agree to the comment of Chris Busch. In order for the plan to succeed, specific rules or guidelines should be in place.