State Implementation Plans: Carbon Reduction Lessons Thomas D. Peterson President and CEO January 31, 2014
2 | 9/16/ Center for Climate Strategies
3 | 9/16/ Policy Development Paradigms – Brandeis “Laboratories of Democracy” – Clinton “Hard to Build a Skyscraper from the Sky Up” – Applied Democracy, Governance, Self Determination – Product Development Via Customer Preferences – Collaboration and Decentralization Processes – Comprehensive, Multi Objective, Stakeholder Planning – Subnational and National Policy Integration
4 | 9/16/ State Climate Plans Mechanisms/SectorsESRCITLUAFWCC Codes and standards ? ? ? ? ? Financial & pricing incentives ? ? ? ? ? Technical & financial assistance ? ? ? ? ? Voluntary & negotiated agreements ? ? ? ? ? Information & education ? ? ? ? ? Disclosure & transparency mechanisms ? ? ? ? ? Research & development ? ? ? ? ? Carbon trading mechanisms ? ? ? ? ? Carbon taxes & tax shift mechanisms ? ? ? ? ? Enhanced or innovative new revenue mechanisms ? ? ? ? ? Hybrid combinations ? ? ? ? ?
5 | 9/16/ Carbon Down
6 | 9/16/ Energy Security © CCS, 2012
7 | 9/16/ $2,585/job* $4,215/job* $29,240/job * $7,670/job* $10,994/job* Jobs ROI
8 | 9/16/ Economic Strategies From “Summary of Key Factors Contributing to Macroeconomic Impacts of GHG Mitigation Options” Dan Wei, Adam Rose, and Noah Dormady, CCS/USC 2011
9 | 9/16/ New Markets
10 | 9/16/ New Investors
11 | 9/16/ Clean Air Act Implications SIP portfolio techniques for GHGs well established States familiar with GHG tonnage reduction approaches States familiar with reaching multi objective goals States familiar with mixing rate and tonnage instruments Crossing sectors, instruments harder with rate approaches States and stakeholders want flexibility, choice, participation Economic, energy, health, and equity issues matter All sectors and levels of government need to play