Greenhouse Gas Registries and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR) Western Regional Air Partnership Information Sharing Meeting on Climate Change Santa Fe, NM – August 25-26, 2005 Ken Colburn Center for Climate Strategies (CCS)

GHG Registry Evolution NH 1999 WI 2000 CA 2000 ? Baseline protection (vs. “no good deed goes unpunished”) Encourage early reductions Start learning to quantify GHGs, do inventories, etc. Multiple pollutants

Idea Spread, Not Surprisingly ED & Environment Resources Trust Emissions brokers (CO2e, Evolution, NatSource) Other states Also – EU National Registers under Kyoto Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR) CCX – a prospective “trading floor” “New & improved” 1605b (?) … so has much confusion

Voluntary & Mandatory: Much Different Animals Voluntary: Registry provides a central, independent repository for credible information about emissions activities (e.g., for recognition, encouragement, baseline protection) Mandatory & Cap and Trade: Registry performs a critical data management and accounting role and serves as a ledger of all transactions; information = $ / enforcement

NEG-ECP Plan called for developing a regional “emissions trading registry, and methods for baseline creation and credit generation” to –(a) provide baseline protection and –(b) gain experience in certifying credits and trading regionally NESCAUM started on a regional voluntary registry in 2003, coordinating with major existing efforts –WRI / WBCSD GHG Protocol –CCAR RGGI changed all that (regulatory driver) –Voluntary, Mandatory, & Emissions/Allowances Tracking –Facility-level data; Enforcement quality data required –Data custody & storage issues; offsets, etc. Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR)

GHG Registry (e.g., RGGR) Voluntary Cap & Trade (RGGI)Mandatory Reporting Regulatory Allowance Tracking Emissions Tracking Projects (Offsets) Entity-wide Trying to fill three “Policy Spaces” 123 Mechanism: Multi-state MOU or through a new regional organization

Complex: Not to Be Entered Into Lightly (1) Function & Purpose Design components (sectors, etc.) Geographical boundaries (state, nation, globe) Organizational boundaries (entity, facility,…) Ownership / control –Owner vs. operator –Minority ownership / consolidation Gases covered Base year Offsets / project-based (never been done)

Complex: Not to Be Entered Into Lightly (2) Operational boundaries –Sources covered –Direct & indirect emissions (upstream) Frequency of reporting Verification (3 rd party, certification) De minimis emissions Quantification requirements / tools Software; data storage & management Enforcement Public access / transparency

Good News: Need Not Fear Lots of good information now, and “marketplace of ideas” about registries is rapidly converging EU Emission Trading Scheme will work out many remaining kinks – e.g., Legal, financial, & operational issues Compass points clearly toward mandatory U.S. programs (has design ramifications) –Bingaman-Domenici “Sense of the Senate” Resolution Quantification tools & approaches are rapidly becoming standardized (WRI, ISO, etc.) Not “rocket science”

Concern: Interest may be eclipsing capacity –Not much pre-existing institutional capacity –Only significant funding source is the states themselves –Deadlines (e.g., CT – 1/1/2006) looming Advance or complicate federal action? –Both, but mostly spur it –Sources will seek greater consistency (e.g., federal) –Will help build toward a market –International linkages may impact intransigence –Future states will have precedent, rationale, and a better path to follow Suggestion: Don’t look to 1605(b)… –Recent improvements, but still several fatal flaws Registries: Other Thoughts

Registry / Tracking capability is vital to the success of future regulatory climate efforts by states – Many non-regulatory efforts available – A key part of the GHG “learning curve” Bottom line for states: Proceed, but do so carefully and collaboratively – Complex but doable –Ideal topic for multi-state collaboration Key Conclusions