Sentences with phrase «carbon emission laws»

Not exact matches

It's essential to extend and expand tax incentives for carbon capture, update state laws to include CCUS technology in clean energy standards, and fund continued carbon capture RD&D, among other things, if we are going to reach our emissions - cutting goals.

Right now, a major climate fight is blowing up in Australia — the government is about to pass a law that would cut carbon emissions and get polluters to pay.

The resulting reduction in carbon emissions is particularly striking given that buildings at the site include restored and refurbished Victorian Mill buildings, some of which are Grade II listed (designated as being particularly important and of special interest and protected by UK law), within a Conservation Area and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

The bill would put into law the government's long - term goal to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 60 per cent by 2050, and set out how it could be achieved.

Since, as the editorial points out, federal laws such as the Clean Air Act are not subject to the whim of this or any future president, carbon emissions also need to be addressed by federal legislation.

Beth Newcomer The Legislative Analyst for NYC Council Member Helen Rosenthal (District 6, Upper West Side) encouraged attendees to reach out to their local Council Members and urge them to support the following legislative initiatives: • Possible legislation regarding divestment of the city's pension funds from fossil fuel companies • A bill to require the city to do a carbon footprint analysis of all the products the city procures, and to use that analysis to inform a policy of low - carbon operations • A number of bills to reduce the carbon emissions of city - owned vehicles and improve the sustainability of city buildings • A bill to enhance the city's already - strong idling laws so as to make them easier to enforce Find your Council Member here.

The CLF argued that adding more fossil fuel generation — even an efficient gas - fired plant — would prevent Massachusetts from cutting its carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent by the year 2050, as state law requires.

But by putting the targets into law and mandating a set of regulations — including requiring 35 percent of the country's electricity to come from clean sources by 2024; establishing a voluntary carbon market; developing incentives to promote renewable energy; phasing out fossil fuel subsidies; and forcing companies in the largest carbon polluting sectors to report their emissions — they said the results could be groundbreaking.

However, MacKenzie said he is wary of deriving laws to regulate contrails from aircraft the way carbon emissions are regulated and taxed.

«Reducing carbon emissions is crucial, but it's not a problem that Washington alone can solve,» says panel co-chair Jay Manning, an environmental lawyer at Cascadia Law Group in Olympia, Washington, and former director of the Washington Department of Ecology.

Extending current energy and efficiency laws past their sunset dates could reduce U.S. carbon emissions by an additional 5 billion metric tons by 2040.

As for Wara, the shortcomings of current carbon markets are not enough to dissuade him from his belief that laws governing greenhouse gas emissions should be enacted as soon as possible.

The authors argue a carbon roadmap, driven by a simple rule of thumb or «carbon law» of halving emissions every decade, could catalyse disruptive innovation.

«A «carbon law» offers pathway to halve emissions every decade.»

A «carbon law» approach, say the international team of scientists, ensures that the greatest efforts to reduce emissions happens sooner not later and reduces the risk of blowing the remaining global carbon budget to stay below 2 °C.

With the global economy in recession, fuel prices still high and ever - tighter emissions laws ahead, you might imagine that they too would be heading at full tilt towards an economical, low - carbon future.

Why It Matters: Passing laws to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, methane emissions, or industrial particles could have an important effect on climate change.

Under President Obama's Climate Action Plan, the United States has acted under existing laws to cut emissions with sector - specific policies, including: emissions regulations; tax incentives for clean energy technologies; standards for energy - efficient appliances, buildings, and vehicles; and voluntary partnership programs to address market barriers to low - carbon strategies.

Environmental groups have sought to force the federal government to restrict carbon dioxide emissions using the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act (because of threats to polar bears from global warming) and other federal laws, and now they are poised to add the Clean Water Act to the list.

A number of states and several business groups prepare to sue the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the rules to cut carbon emissions, which is expected to set off a large number of law suits.

The state also has a five - year - old law banning power companies from importing coal - fired electricity by setting steep carbon emissions standards.

Although U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions associated with electricity generation have fallen from the 2005 level, they are projected to increase in the coming decades, based on analysis in EIA's Annual Energy Outlook 2015 (AEO2015) that reflects current laws and regulations, and therefore does not include proposed rules such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan.

The challengers next claim is that EPA is completely barred from limiting power plants» dangerous carbon pollution because EPA has already used another part of the law — Section 112 — to curb the same plants» emissions of mercury and other hazardous air pollutants.

We will know if the Obama Administration is truly serious about pursuing a 28 % reduction in America's GHG emissions by 2025 only if we see President Obama issuing formal directions to the EPA to use its full regulatory authority to the maximum extent currently allowed by law in suppressing US carbon emissions.

A report published by the Environmental Law Students Association (ELSA), called for a «carbon price escalator» with S$ 5 annual increments in the tax rate, arguing that Singapore's initial price of S$ 5 is too far off from the benchmark of US$ 50 — US$ 100 per tonne of emissions recommended by World Bank's High - Level Comission on Carbon Prices report.

It was passed by Parliament with one dissenting voice and obligates all Govt depts and, increasingly, businesses to reduce carbon emissions by law.

With its editorial, The Case for a Carbon Tax, the New York Times joins the growing community of opinion leaders, policy experts and, yes, elected officials who not only recognize the power of carbon taxes to quickly and equitably reduce emissions but also sense the emergence of a political critical mass that can enact fees into law.

If policy makers followed the carbon law, adoption of renewables would continue its current pace of doubling energy production every 5.5 years, and carbon dioxide sequestration technologies would need to ramp up in order for the the planet to reach net - zero emissions by the middle of the century, say the researchers.

Though the mandate was ostensibly aimed at reducing carbon emissions, the law did not require that emissions be monitored to measure whether the mandate is having any impact on the level of emission.

The Green Guides also note that it is «deceptive to claim that a carbon offset represents an emission reduction if the activity that causes the reduction is already required by law».

These bottom - up pressures would likely render such an agreement a dead letter, or at least make it in effect a tax applicable only to the law - abiding developed countries that represent an ever - shrinking share of global carbon emissions.

The text of AB 32 requires the state's Air Resources Board, the agency responsible for implementing the law, to maximize «additional environmental and economic co-benefits for California» and consider «localized impacts in communities that are already adversely impacted by air pollution» in its plan for cutting carbon dioxide emissions.

If carbon dioxide is indeed a pollutant when present in excessive concentrations in the atmosphere — which the EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding for carbon says that it is — then by law and by past precedent the Clean Air Act is the appropriate means for controlling all of America's own greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of their source.

Then - Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was pushing for a carbon cap - and - trade program; still, the law's language allowed the ARB to consider a variety of methods for regulating greenhouse gas emissions, including a tax or fee on carbon dioxide.

Existing laws such as renewable portfolio standards, energy efficiency resource standards, long - term requirements for additional hydropower and wind power, and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions caps will require a significant reduction in natural gas - fired generation throughout New England.

In summary, a strong case can be made that the US emissions reduction commitment for 2025 of 26 % to 28 % clearly fails to pass minimum ethical scrutiny when one considers: (a) the 2007 IPCC report on which the US likely relied upon to establish a 80 % reduction target by 2050 also called for 25 % to 40 % reduction by developed countries by 2020, and (b) although reasonable people may disagree with what «equity» means under the UNFCCC, the US commitments can't be reconciled with any reasonable interpretation of what «equity» requires, (c) the United States has expressly acknowledged that its commitments are based upon what can be achieved under existing US law not on what is required of it as a mater of justice, (d) it is clear that more ambitious US commitments have been blocked by arguments that alleged unacceptable costs to the US economy, arguments which have ignored US responsibilities to those most vulnerable to climate change, and (e) it is virtually certain that the US commitments can not be construed to be a fair allocation of the remaining carbon budget that is available for the entire world to limit warming to 2 °C.

With Kyoto now passed into law and the European Emissions Trading System about to enter into force, the business lobby is increasingly tantalized by the prospect of carbon trading.

Cap - and - trade is the cornerstone of Assembly Bill 32 (AB32), California's historic climate change law that mandates a reduction in carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

In 2011's AEP vs. Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals may not file nuisance lawsuits regarding carbon emissions under federal common law because carbon emissions are already regulated by the Clean Air Act.

Friends of the Earth Finland continue to put pressure on the Finnish government to enact a strong and comprehensive climate law — to ensure Finland reduces carbon emissions, year on year, every year.

Friends of the Earth Finland will be working to ensure that the draft law includes binding carbon budgets which set explicit targets of at least 40 per cent emissions cuts by 2020 and 95 per cent by 2050, and that sectors covered by the EU's emissions trading scheme are also included in the law.

The head of Illinois anti-nuclear organization Environmental Law and Policy Center — which is funded by fossil fuel interests and other energy companies that would benefit from closing nuclear plants — has doubled down on his efforts to increase carbon emissions by closing nuclear power plants and replacing them with fossil fuels.

If the EPA acts unilaterally to restrict carbon dioxide emissions, the impact on the economy could be even worse than a cap and trade law enacted by Congress.

«The bill declares that current law does not authorize or require the regulation of climate change or global warming and nullifies certain proposed rules relating to greenhouse gas and carbon pollution emissions,» the description reads.

Barack Obama raised the development of a green economy to the top of America's agenda, calling on Congress to pass a law cutting the carbon emissions that cause global warming

(the climate change movement wants to enact laws that allow us to avoid dangerous levels of carbon emissions.

Milloy writes, «although the trading in carbon emissions credits was voluntary, the CCX was intended to be the hub of the mandatory carbon trading established by a cap - and - trade law.

(even though people have different theories on how to solve the climate change problem, they all agree on a reduction in carbon emissions, and try to pass laws that focus on that.)

The different policies being introduced specifically to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions vary from international treaties, e.g., the Kyoto Protocol (2005), to national laws, e.g., the UK's Climate Change Act, 2008, and even regional legislation e.g., California (USA)'s Global Warming Solutions Act, 2006.

Plans include independent evaluations of financed activities including verification of emission reductions, seek to achieve significant CO2 reductions over the shortest time frame, require proof of additionality taking into consideration existing laws like I - 937, and shall provide sufficient funding to mitigate increases in electric and natural gas costs from the carbon tax for qualifying low - income households.