Should EPA Use Emissions Averaging or Cap and Trade to Implement § 111 (d) of the Clean Air Act?

摘要

Given the overwhelming case on the merits for a cap-and-trade approach to §111(d), why have respected and sophisticated organizations endorsed an inferior approach? Pure politics seems to be the reason. The opponents of national global warming control legislation made such a target of "cap and trade" that they scared advocacy groups away from that approach, even though it is more consistent with limited government than rate-based averaging. That might make sense if an almost equally effective alternative approach were available. But there is no such alternative. Instead, by advocating a markedly inferior approach in the administrative process, where legal and policy weaknesses can be probed in detail and finally adjudicated by the courts, the proponents of this approach put the whole §111(d) project at risk. One hopes EPA will be wise enough not to listen to them.