Sentences with phrase «emissions caps which»

In May 2016, the courts found that Massachusetts law unambiguously directs the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to set sector - specific, declining emissions caps which lead to an aggregate 25 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

Not exact matches

Cenovus and Suncor have been vocal supporters of the NDP government's climate change policies which include an annual 100 - megatonne cap on total emissions from the oilsands.

Jack Layton and the NDP are campaigning on a cap - and - trade program, which would set a $ 35 per tonne price on carbon and cap emissions from large industry.

Provinces where agriculture is a significant part of the economy could opt for a cap - and - trade scheme which would guarantee emission reduction and reward good stewardship.

Overly optimistic projections of future oil supply, which are much higher than the latest NEB projections and don't consider the Alberta government's cap on oil sands emissions imposed by its Climate Leadership Plan.

He cited the Paris climate accord, in which governments committed to capping heat - trapping emissions, as an example of taking action to fight global warming based on scientific evidence.

His other challenge came out of my major moral claim, that any serious effort to reduce emissions by any significant amount, let alone the 60 - 80 % called for by the European Union and some of our presidential candidates, would destroy economies all over the world and condemn the poor to perpetual poverty - which is why China and India will have nothing to do with emissions caps.

The ad accuses Slaughter of a voting for a slew of tax increases, including the so - called «cap and trade» emissions measure and trots out the frequent Republicant talking point that the 2010 federal health care bill cuts $ 716 billion for Medicare, which is actually spread out over 10 years and targets subsidies to insurance companies.

Yet plans to tackle automobile emissions remain in their infancy outside California, which has implemented an economywide cap - and - trade program and a host of policies aimed at curbing carbon from cars and trucks.

It also stirred confusion about the governor's legal authority and what will happen to the carbon trading program, which caps utility carbon dioxide emissions in 10 Northeastern and mid-Atlantic states, at a time when national climate legislation appears dead on Capitol Hill.

In that regard, I introduced the first Cap and Dividend legislation in the United States Congress, which would have put a price on greenhouse gas emissions and rebated the proceeds to consumers in the form of a Healthy Climate Dividend.

Capping emissions makes carbon scarcer and lets private companies raise the carbon price, which companies will likely pass on to consumers.

But a fixed national cap would be better once China's emissions peak, which could happen in the 2020s or 2030s.

Although well - intentioned, agreeing to such a strategy would involve giving them lax emission caps, which would be like printing excess money.

That legislation, which Klein calls «the granddaddy of all emissions trading markets,» created a cap - and - trade system for utilities to reduce the sulfur - based pollutants that cause acid rain.

But developing countries, which placed a higher priority on economic growth, refused to accept caps on their emissions.

The most important thing that could happen to drive IGCC forward would be putting a price on CO2 emissions in the form of a mandatory economy - wide «cap and trade» approach, which is what a Senate resolution passed last summer recommended.»

Several bills pending in Congress would set a so - called cap - and - trade policy under which an overall limit on pollution would be set — and companies with low output could sell their allowances to those that fail to cut emissions as long as the total stays within the total pollution cap.

It enacted the world's first multisector cap - and - trade system in 2001, which informed the European Union's Emissions Trading System that premiered in 2005 and is now in its second commitment period.

This has implications for green taxes (which includes carbon taxes and tradeable emissions cap).

In 2017, Danny was appointed by the California State Senate to the Independent Emissions Market Advisory Committee, which is charged with reviewing California's cap - and - trade program.

CAP AND TRADE: Proceeds from the cap - and - trade system — which is designed to reduce Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions — are projected to be $ 1.9 billion in 2017 — up from last year's projection of $ 1.3 billion — and will be used to invest in green projects and climate change initiativCAP AND TRADE: Proceeds from the cap - and - trade system — which is designed to reduce Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions — are projected to be $ 1.9 billion in 2017 — up from last year's projection of $ 1.3 billion — and will be used to invest in green projects and climate change initiativcap - and - trade system — which is designed to reduce Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions — are projected to be $ 1.9 billion in 2017 — up from last year's projection of $ 1.3 billion — and will be used to invest in green projects and climate change initiatives.

I do not see any way of reducing CO2 emissions without a carbon tax, or its innocent maskarade as cap and trade, which raises the prices of carbon as well.

There's another advantage to this approach, which is that there is far stronger public support for advancing and disseminating low - carbon energy sources than there is for restricting emissions of carbon dioxide using a rising cost through a cap.

You can argue whether regulations or fees on various kinds of emissions and pollution (of which cap and trade is one variant) are more effective or economically efficient, but there needs to be someone with authority.

Yesterday, Senator Richard Lugar, a moderate Republican from Indiana, proposed breaking the impasse with the Lugar Practical Energy and Climate Plan, which lacks the most contentious element, an emissions cap and trading system for pollution credits.

His critics show few signs of ever accommodating the ideas he now presses, which include a prompt moratorium on new coal - burning power plants until they can capture and store carbon dioxide and a rising tax on fuels contributing greenhouse - gas emissions, with the revenue passed back directly to citizens, avoiding the complexities of «cap and trade» bills.

That said, I think Andrew may have been wondering about which COUNTRY has to count the emissions toward their cap or target — the country that exports the coal, the country that makes (say) the cars, or the country that buys them?

Separate caps on carbon emissions by the electric utilities and manufacturing sectors, which would have to buy permits to pollute from the federal government.

These offset types are both eligible to be converted to ARB compliance Offset Credits, which can be used by California entities to help meet their emissions reductions obligations in the Cap - and - Trade Program.

CO2 emissions from coal - fired generation were up both in the RGGI region and nationally in the first half of 2013, compared with 2012 levels, which indicates that the new RGGI cap could become more binding in the future.

The program also allows for the limited use of CO2 offsets, which are reductions in emissions from activities not subject to the RGGI cap, as a compliance option.

[1] The resulting proposal was a market - based cap and trade approach which intended to legislate power plant emissions caps without specifying the specific methods used to reach those caps.

This would be helpful in calculating the atmospheric concentration at which CO2 would cease to increase if emissions were naturally (or forcibly) capped at X % higher levels than today.

The company which finances verified emissions reductions at $ 3 per ton now might be able to save future expenditures (particularly in the event of a global cap - and - trade system) or turn a 500 % profit in a little over a decade.

In a joint announcement, President Obama said the U.S. would cut its GHG emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025 — about double the pace the U.S. had been targeting in the 2005 - 2020 period — while President Xi Jinping said China would aim to cap its emissions increases by 2030, by which time it expected to get 20 percent of its total energy consumption from zero - emissions sources.

Implementing border adjustments for an economywide carbon tax or cap - and - trade program would require determining the GHG emissions embodied in imports (that is, the amount of greenhouse gases emitted in producing each imported good and service), which would be extremely difficult if applied to most imports (but not if applied only to imports of fossil fuels).

California's cap - and - trade program for greenhouse gas emissions took effect in January 2013, and as the period of enforcement unfolds, both regulated entities and the California Air Resources Board (which is responsible for the implementation and management of the program) are considering how best to manage costs within the system.

After the demise of the Waxman Markey legislation in 2009 — which would have capped U.S. greenhouse gas emissions — most of the environmental community put all of its eggs in the basket of Obama administration regulation, particularly under the Clean Air Act.

Within the cap, companies receive or buy emission allowances which they can trade with one another as needed.

That is to say that there will be one EU - wide cap on the number of emission allowances and this cap will decrease annually along a linear trend line, which will continue beyond the end of the third trading period (2013 - 2020).

Important elements in this respect are the determination of the cap on emissions in the Directive well in advance of the start of the trading period, a linear reduction factor for the cap on emissions which continues to apply also beyond 2020 and the extension of the trading period from 5 to 8 years.

1ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!!?? Renewable energy mandates (a.k.a. soviet style productions quotas) and «a cap» on carbon emissions (a.k.a. Soviet style energy rationing) ARE NOT «market signals»!!!! They are tools with which the government picks and chooses winners in the enrgy industry.

Those who believe they can profit from carbon credits because polluters with emission caps will pay for them point to the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism, which allows parties to meet their emission reduction obligations by paying developing countries to grow forests onto land cleared long ago.

The report finds that under a Paris - compliant cap for the EU - ETS, carbon prices would need to average $ 45 - $ 55 / tonne for a sustained period to drive coal and lignite power plants out of the market and keep emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, which seeks to limit temperature rise well below 2 ˚C of warming versus pre-industrial times.

Finally, a feasible cap - and - trade design would have to consider many details, such as which sectors are covered by the cap, how emission allowances will be distributed, whether there will be price corridors, etc..

It sets a cap on carbon emissions which is reduced over time.

This trend was reinforced by the reciprocal climate deal that China struck with the Obama administration in November, under which China agreed to peak its carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 and put a cap on coal burning by 2020.

But SoCal Gas is under no such obligation, because the Porter Ranch plume is comprised of «fugitive emissions», which are «those emissions which are unintentional and could not reasonably pass through a stack, chimney, vent, or other functionally - equivalent opening,» according to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which oversees the state's cap - and - trade system.

The Western Climate Initiative got a critical boost in October when California approved its final cap and trade regulations which will enable the trade of emission credits by 2013.