Sometimes the federal government leads, and sometimes it’s up to the states to point the way.
Washington state regulators on Wednesday unveiled an updated plan to limit greenhouse gas emissions from large polluters, the latest attempt by Gov. Jay Inslee to push ahead with a binding cap on carbon emissions after struggling to win approval from legislators. …
Inslee, who has called climate change "the single most important issue of our time," has gained national attention on environmental issues but so far has failed in his own state to pass ambitious carbon-reduction proposals, including a plan to charge polluters a fee for emissions. Frustrated by inaction in the Legislature, Inslee last year used his executive authority and directed state regulators to limit carbon pollution under the state's Clean Air Act.
Washington isn’t the first state to propose such a limit. Eleven other states, including California, already have some form of carbon emission limits.
The “cap and trade” strategy for limiting carbon emissions at the national level was a factor in the 2008 elections, but Republicans have blocked any proposed legislation. Instead, President Obama has responded with his Clean Power Plan regulations (currently under judicial review). Carbon emissions in the United States have actually fallen while the GDP has improved, mostly because natural gas has replaced coal in a significant portion of America’s electrical generation. Which shows that previous campaigns that railed against carbon limits as “job killers” were all hot air… or maybe hot CO2.
On California’s cap and trade market for carbon, the price of carbon allowances has trended steeply lower. Which is a good sign that the market is working just as intended and the allowances are increasingly not needed. The same has happened in EPA auctions for SO2 under the Clean Air Act. Ten years ago, the lowest successful bid for an SO2 allowance on the spot market was $690. This year? $0.06. That’s exactly the kind of results regulators are after in this kind of market.
And as for warnings that cap and trade markets are expensive?
According to the state's preliminary economic analysis, the rule would cost businesses between $1.4 billion and $2.8 billion over 20 years to comply. But it's also estimated to provide about $14.5 billion in benefits over 20 years, such as improved environmental and health conditions, according to a state analysis.
Polluters want to paint this as “it costs $2.8 billion!” when the truth is “it saves $11.7 billion!”
Eleven states down. Thirty nine to go.