Design issues of a domestic carbon emissions trading system in the USA

Emissions Trading for Climate Policy: US and European Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 114-132

  Morgenstern, Richard D ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84928298692     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511493485.009     Document Type: Chapter

References (13)

1. Burtraw, D., Palmer, K., Bharvikar, R., and Paul, A. 2001. The Effect of Allowance Allocation on the Cost of Carbon Emission Trading. RFF Discussion Paper 01–30, Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
2. Goulder, L. 2002. Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of CO2 Abatement Policies on Energy Intensive Industries. RFF Discussion Paper 02–22, Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
3. Gruenspecht, H. K. 1982. “Differentiated regulation: the case of auto emission standards,” American Economic Review 72: 328–31.
4. Jacoby, H. D., and Ellerman, A. D. 2004. “The safety valve and climate policy,” Energy Policy 32: 481–91.
5. Keeler, A. 2002. “Designing a carbon dioxide trading system: the advantages of upstream regulation.” Mimeo, Americans for Equitable Climate Solutions, July.
6. Olson, M. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Pizer, W. A. 1997. Optimal Choice of Policy Instrument and Stringency Under Uncertainty: The Case of Climate Change.” RFF Discussion Paper 97–17, Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
8. Ross, M. T. 2002. “Analyses of GHG permit allocation and compensation issues.” Presentation before OECD Expert Meeting on the Allocation of GHG Objectives, Paris. Charles River Associates.
9. Schneider, S. H., and Thompson, S. L. 2000. “A simple climate model used in economic studies of global change,” in S. J. Decanio et al. (eds.), New Directions in the Economics and Integrated Assessment of Global Climate Change. Washington, DC: Pew Center on Global Climate Change, pp. 59–80.
10. Smith, A. E. 2002. “Analyses of GHG Permit Allocation and Compensation Issues.” Presentation to the Electric Power Research Institute’s 7th Annual Global Climate Change Research Seminar, Washington DC (June 4–5). Charles River Associates.
11. US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) 2001. “An evaluation of cap-and-trade programs for reducing US carbon emissions.” Washington, DC.
12. Weitzman, M. L. 1974. “Prices vs. quantities,” Review of Economic Studies 41: 477–91.
13. Weyant, J. P., and Hill, J. N. 1999. “Introduction and overview,” Energy Journal, Special Issue: costs of the Kyoto Protocol, pp. 7–14.