Center for Clean Air Policy- A Year Of Growth


Published on

Kyoto Protocol

Published in: News & Politics, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Center for Clean Air Policy- A Year Of Growth

  1. 1. 200 tctongecyCenter For Clean Air Policy T ~hirty years after the first J~rhDay and ten years after the creation of legislation to address lacid rain, advances in clean arpolicy contnu. Domestically in 2000 the US Environmental Pro- tecionAgecy(EPA) moved forwr with a decision to regulate mercury from the electricity sector and issued stitemissions standards for heavy-duty diesel vehicles, while the DC Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the NO 3 State Implementaition Plan (SIP) Call. On the international front, many I uropean countries moved closer to implementing their own domestic emissions trading programs. As 20O0 drew to an end, we also saw the culmination of over ten years of work to address climate change ed just short of success at the Sixth meeting of the of the Conference of Parties (COP6) to the United NiosFramework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in The Thipastuearwsas momeno thfre Center as we marked our 15~~anniversary. We expanded our efforts to address clean air and gtbl warming to encompass some 38 countries and over a dozen US states. We saw our funding incres beyond all previous levels. And we grew our publications list by nearly 50 percent, including majo I contributions to a new landmark book on emissions trading. Topping the list of endeavors werea an intense effort at COP6 where we helped the Parties reach agree- ment on astrong compliance system a solid Clean Development Mechanism (CDNvO governance system and sound accountin-g measures: or carbon sequestration. While COPS discussions ended in a dead- lock, our work leading up to the cohference (in particular the CDN4 Dialogue that brought together nego- tiators from over 20developed and developing countries and inspired the creation of six ground-break- ing papers) fleshed out many issudsandwillcontinue to serve asasource for consensus-building efforts. Also on the international front we helped launch the creation of a CO emnissions trading program in 2 Slovakia, started asimiilar effort iAlPoland and worked closely with IS Caribbean countries to develop regional emissions baselines for tieCaribbean power sector to facilitate their participation in the CDM. Recognizing that US states also haean important role to play in addressing global wanTrhg. we stepped up the efforts of our State Rudaieon Global Climate Change with a focus on opportunities for achieving multiple emissions reduction benhlt. In addition, our workshop on New Directions in Clean Air and Clean Energy Policy brought toehrleading policy thinkers from industry, academia, government and environmental organizations, and underscored the need to integrate energy, environment and trans- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~portation Yearrow th of Gro w h - policy. all those ~~~~~To involved in these and our mans' other efforts. A of G Year ~ ~~~~~~~highlightedyou for helping to make 2000a below, I thank year of successful growth for the Center and look forward ANALYTICAL EXPERTISE to continued progress in the years ahead. INNOVATIVE THINKING __Ned HeIiem POLICY LEADERSHIP NedlHelmne Executive Director CAPACITY BUILDING
  2. 2. POLICY LEADERSHIP domestic circles to advance in 2000. We worked in both international and The Center's policy leadership reached new heights a domestic greenhouse trading programs, be it as part of the Kyoto Protocol, the design of environmentally robust emissions these efforts are listed below. CO tradidg program for aviation. Hfighlights of gas (GHG) emtissions program or an international as Group. European Union (EU) and G-77 countries, o Through our one-of-a-kind CDM Dialogue. delegates fLm Umbrella Foundation for (EC), the UNFCCC Secretariat and staff from the well as representatives from the European Commissiot on the governance structure for (FIL)made significant headway international Environmental Law and Developmen projects in the CDM: and understanding the the CDM; the eligibility of land use, land use changeadfrsr (LULUCF) options for assessing additionality and developingbaen. of a robust compliance ideas. Specifically we pushed for the establishment o At COPG we advanced various innovative policy 2 allowances allocated to developed countries and reduc- system. provisions to assist developing countries by tpigCO tions of potential leakage from sinks projects. trading program for considerato of the Skytrust proposal, a comprehensive EJAs part of a national coalition we promoted per ton of carbon, and all upsremsources, with a price ceiling of $25 US domestic CO, that would auction permits to industries and com- to beused to help to adversely affected workers, recycle the revenues back to citizens and governors h is e frcmedtoso h munities. d~vrnet prepared tefrtsto eomnain nh 0we o3 As the primary consultant to the Slovakian Ministry inclusion and devel- whc identified energy and industrial sectors for scope of a Slovakian CO, emissions trading program, oped preliminary emissions caps for these sectors. Protection on of the' nternational Commrittee onAviation Environmnental for an envi- o Literally"'in the air," we advised aworking group for C9 emnissions from international aviation and advocated design elements of apotential trading program with aviation NO~emi- ozon pollution (also apower-ful 0GHassociated ronmnentallysustainable program that addresses a htrong compliance system. sions) and includes stringent emissions targets with flesh out the fundamental lastya for the EU Environment Directorate to o Following up on the Center's successful effort of for montitoring; reporting and or{.a new initiative to define the systems design of a European trading system, we embarked by an EU GHG trading system. The project team also includes emis- verifying the GMG emissions that would be covered lawyers from FIELD in the United Kingdom. The monitor- sions experts from TNO in the Netherlands and envirdnrmental 0GH Directorate as it makes the case for a Europe-wide ing project will provide critical information to the Enk'ironment Ue trading system. impli- States, the Center co-hosted a forum on the environmental o: Connecting policy makers from Germany and theUnId office of the Germian-based Heinrich Boll Foundation. Featur- DC cations of electricity restructuring with the Washing-ton. en, organizations from both sides of the Atlantic, this forum pro- ing speakers from industry, government and environc protect against use of renewable energy and energy efficiency and vided success stories about ways to encourage inrae on the air emissions pr~s. The forum highlighted the Center's work emissions increases as part of the restructuring on brownf~ields sites. benefits of encouraging clean, efficient generation examinring envi- exjhneof United States and European professionals o3 For nearly 10 years, the Center has facilitated the This year's German Marshall efcey to transportation and land use. ronmental issues from climate change and energy in one-on-one iie ~ i~ii h ntdSae and Canada, participated and New York Fund Envioronmental Exchange p riiat for policy makers and practitioners in Washington, DC meetings and attended Center-sponsored luncheons edition of Perspectives - City. To keep former Fellows up-to-date and the Fe'low's network strong, we released the third the official Fellowship newsletter. NOOs and in Lviv for regional and local policy makers, industry, o tn Central Europe, the Center organized a workh learn about and discuss international and domestic academia representatives. The workshop provided teopruiyt city authorities asked for our assistance in develop- climate change issues. As a result of the workshop, ltIvsrgoaan region. rtunities in their ing a climate change strategy and exploring JI oppo
  3. 3. 1CENTER tA Thanks to SupportersI also our most successful year to date financially. In addition to Not only was 2000 a big year for the Center policy-wise, it ras Wallace Global lielto acknowledge several new sources, including the the generous support of our existing funders, we would (for our Brazil work) and the following foreign the Tinker Fdundation Fund (for our international climate change efforts), the European Commission. govermnents: Australia, Canada, Denmark, German5, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and reuAas a supporter. We were also excited to have the Energy Foundation Electric for their support as Friends of the Center: Wisconsin The Center is pleased to recognize the following corporation PubliL, Service Company. Power Company, Florida Power &Light and Arizona New Faces Power, who of D1irectors in 2000: Frank Cassidy, President of PSEG the Neth- The Center welcomed two new members to its Board of Had of the Global and European Assessment Division replaced retiring member Larry Codey and Dr. Bert Metz, as the first international member. We appreciate erlands National Institute of Public Health and the Environmnwhojoined make our successes possible. in hepn the support of these and our existing board members BOARD bF DIRECTORS Governor Tony Earl*- Quarles & Brady Chair Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Robert Shinn, Jr.* - New VIice-Chair NedfHlmeh Center for Clean Air Policy IExehitive Director frank Cassidy - Pyb lic Service Electric &Gas Power Secretary Mary D. Nichol -_The Resources Agency of California Congressman Jim Coopr - Equitable Securities Corporation Secretary Jane T. Nishid j~rln eatetof Environment William Davis -N a aMhw oe Corporation Di Louis Peoples - David G.Hawkins - Idatural Resources Defense Council WilliamRsebr - E3 Ventures Dr. Mark Levine - Lwec Berkeley Laboratory Ronald E. Russell -Rusl Energy Services Company Jim Maddy* I1 National Park Founidation Conrad Schneiider - Clean Air Task Force Andrew T. MEaigan - Applied Sustainability - - ~~~Govemrnor-Thmy Thompson -Wisconsin - Health and the Environment Dr. Bert Metz - Netherlands Nation l Institute of Public VictoriaJ. Tschinkel* - Landers &Parsons Senator Gaylord Nelson** - The Wilderness Society 2 *Exeutive committee Member *Member Emeritus European Office USOffice Center for Clean Air Policy w' Michalska 12 750 First Street, NE 110 00 Prague 1 Suite 940 Czech Republic Washington, DC 20002 420.2.2421.5303 202.408.9260 420.2.2422.9770 202.408.8896 '
  4. 4. ''AirlieSeries Summary 053 ~~~About the Process forausgenoegs 4 4~I. r. 'P < t ~~~~~ g~stRT* lay the intellectual foundation ~infr elzngcs-ffciereutos greenhousega O R FM ~~~~»~~~~~~~~ emissions trading o system, which is a leading policy op- gas emissions. The papers are the product of a unique 1996, the -5Center for Clean Air Policy. Since November "Green- ~~~~~~~Center has convened regular meetings of its group of 'I. Gas Emissions Trading Braintrust", a -- ~¾house ~~ 'is-v high-level representatives of industry, environmental government aece x~ttC ~fc~ >t~organizations, state and federal papers and academe. The opinions expressed in these by the extensive dialogue with Braintrust are those of the Center, though our views are informed participants. Please see www cc porg for copies. research and analysis of key design and imple- Braintrust members and Center staff conduct and proposals to the group for discussion. The mentation questions, then bring their findings design options in detail rather than to arrive purpose of this process is to investigate alternative at consensus on a preferred option. of priority issues, including: definition of the At the outset, the Braintrust ide iid a number of who would be required to hold allowances, instrument that would be trade 1, determination of the trading system compliance infra- methods for allocating allowaneadthe elements a focus on energy-related carbon dioxide with structure. Braintrust members are to start Braintrust include the integration of additional emissions. Secondary issues idnied by the of emissions reductions from forestry and greenhouse gases into the system, the incorporation the mitigation of any ddverse impacts of carbon land use activities and foreign Lountries, and regulation on US industry. Why the "Airlie"l Carbon Trading Papers? meetings. Situated outside Wash- the Braintrust's The Airlie Center serves as the backdrop for an informal, congenial atmosphere that al- ington, DC in Warrenton, Virgna Airlie provides door" and to build strong working relation- the lows participants to leave therafltin "at process. ships. These factors have bee critical to the success of the Braintrust Aout the Center-for- Clean Air Policy developed has a strong record of designing Air Policy Since its inception in 1985, the Cetr for Clean problems. The Center's dialogue on acid rain and prdmoting market-based souin to environmental the Bush the SO 2 control program that were adopted by in the 1980s identified many of theelenso 1990, the h Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Since Frame- Administration and eventually codildi change. Center staff have participated in the Center has been active on the issue of giobal climateand in domestic efforts to address greenhouse gases, work Convention on Climate Change Aegotiations policies such as emissions trading and joint implemen- analyzing and advocating market-base d climate Center is energy sector joint implementation project. The tation. The Center brokered the worlA's first electrict industry restructuring, and transportation also active' in the areas of air quality egaton, and land use.
  5. 5. ne Publ~ished by thegn"~~l o rjcs i e Ceniter for Cle9an Air Pollicy ~ ~ Sujite 940 nefivteesueeauroGM 756*ir'stStree~tNE Washingtop, DC 2Q000 USA t Papers available at: www.ccapl~org
  6. 6. ,iy . 'T, " ,gwl I I I I I I
  7. 7. ON HIGHLIGHTS OF STATE INITIATIVES CHANGE C C~ed~foy GLOBAL CLIMATE have in arsig global climate cagteCne in recognition of the important role states promote state-level efforts since 1992, has been working actively to Change. for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) on -Ozone poluton and Global Climate when it was tapped to-lead the Wisconsin Dialdu approach to addressing greenhouse gas Since that time, we have continued to emploj a holistic Wisconsin, New Jersey and Massachu- with several .statet, including to support establishing new emissions, working directly into existing programs and concerns change setts, to include climate -change ways to achi eve "multiple benefits" that integrate climate on programs, with a strong focus and air quality considerations.I directed the State Roufldtable on for the past two pars, CCAP has - and On a more collective front, and energy regulators which brings togetlhr kyevronmental states, to Global Climate Change, swell - from a dozen leading soon, transportation and land use planning ofiil pollutant approaches. stategize on various multiple share lessons learned, coordinate efforts and the important areas where states can take action have highlight' Throughout these efforts, we to act. and promote others emis- at addressing greenhouse gas state initiaie aimed directly only Below is a sample of innovative benefits" ojcu. While many of these could be considered oth- sions, or, where significant "side states, and of the need to act. We encourage small "first steps", they highlight a recognitil address global climate change. actions can help ers, to consider how similar CLIMjATE CHANGE STAT E FORTS TO APPRESS GR~rwumvuE_GAg REIUCTION-GOALS goal (NJ DEP) has set a voluntary of Enviro metlProtection to 2005. The New Jersey Department 3.5 percent below 1990 prior to reduce New Jersey's greenhouse gas -,missions by Order issued by the Commnis- 1998 unc ler an Administrative The goal was created in March seven companies have Order 1998-o9). Additionally, sioner of the NJ DEP (Administrative considering the voluntary Covenant of Sustainability/ currently gas signed and several more are the State in achieving its greenhouse NJ Greenhouse Gas Initiative, pledgin to assist reduction goal, outlined above. the state, from new energy facilities in Oregon has established a CO. standard for emissions the Oregon Energy Facility Siting in 1997. ¶lhe standard, set by pursuant to state law passed power plants, and non-gener- natural gas plants, non-base-load installing equipment that Council, applies to base-load can meet the standard by either ating energy facilities. Applicants offsc~ projects. The law~requires -thatthe new offset projects reduces direct emissions or through emissons in one of two ways: by implementing projects will avoid, sequester., or displace by aying an established amount per ton of CO 2, currently or directly or through a third party either option there is no limi- 1 Trust which prcaes offsets. Under $0.57/ton, into a Climate the project. WIB 32-83) tation on the location of and offset ww~nrysaeo~sllmtllm7n.t that new generation projects Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board requires at a cost of $1.50 a period of 20 years, currently one percent of their annual CO, emissions over facility operators develop, in consultation with of opera on, the per ton. Before the first year approvred project for expending the funds. the staff of the Siting Board, an
  8. 8. d Council recently voted to recomnmen The Washington State Energy Facility Site Evaluation in several ar- pant's permitting, requirements that the Governor approve changes to a power activities that would offset the i.8 "to develop a plan ndpyfor gas eas, including a requirement through the burning of natural be emitted from tefcly million tons diesel fuel." will of C02 that and backup ww~fe~agvCealsajnv~rs~t a rule that City Council have proposed The Speaker and other Members of the New York power plants within New York CO 2 emission standard for all would establish an output-based C'O would decrease as new gen- the citywide emitssion rate for City. Under the proposed rule,within the City. erating capacity was installed work within as a part of her campaign to The Governor-elect of New Ham'pshire pled~ed lead the effort to require older plants three to five years of the onset of her term in 6ffice to international treaty gases from these plants to "meet within the State to reduce greenhouse (Kyoto) goals". C4INGE BENEFITS' STATE MAEASURES WITH CLIMATE directly at addressing greenhouse gas emis- in addition to the measures, listed above, died current measures employed by states that of some of the sions, below are several examPles benefits. have potential climate change the amount of yve- have develop initiatives aimed at reducing Several states and localities infill development and such ejues as: new transit-lines, called "smnart growth" hicle miles traveled by promoting choice initiatives, and other so downtown redevelopment, commuter n ~*ra~rw~og initiatives. beyond, be sold in the state, in 2003 and California requires that ten percent of new cars to six percent of this can be met as certified by Ithe State; up zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) vehicles (e.g.. hybrids), the remaining through partial credits for certain super Ibwemission In 2000, the California Air Resources (e.g. electkic vehicles). four percent must be pure ZEVs tran sit agencies to dem- for transit buses, requiring certain 15 percent ZEB for their Board adopted a similar regulation in 206(3 and to begin purchasing onstrate zero-emission buses (ZEB) fleets in 2008. www~rb~c~go/mspog/zvprg/zeproghtr#facts of- who produce surplus energy, 30 states have passed net metering laws enblngcutomers excess energy back to their en- renewable~ sources, to feed the during ten generated from small-scale only for the net energy they consume ergy supplier. These customers ar then hre a given period. renew- 4 decisions, io states have passed As a result of electricity restructurinlg an other 'state percentage of electricity policy requires that a minimum able portfolio standards (RPS). This Additionally, the city of Ann come from a renewable source. sold from a generator or supplier established an RPS for most electricity ArborI Michigan through its franchise Lights has within the city (Chapter 37)- and ww~c~cueuslrdietyecmTp=P&akrga