SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California is debuting its new, landmark cap-and-trade program with an auction of greenhouse gas pollution permits, despite an eleventh-hour lawsuit filed by the state’s largest business group.
The cap-and-trade plan is a central piece of the state’s 2006 global warming law, AB32, a suite of regulations meant to reduce dramatically the state’s emissions of heat-trapping gases.
The program places a limit, or cap, on emissions from individual polluters. Businesses are required to cut emissions to cap levels or buy allowances from other companies for each ton over the cap that is discharged annually. If a business were to cut emissions below the cap, it could profit by selling its extra allowances.
The program’s first auction today is being closely watched, as it will essentially put a price on carbon emissions for the first time in state history. Only the European Union has implemented a similar plan in terms of scope.
But the California Chamber of Commerce has sued, challenging the validity of the state’s cap-and-trade program. The lawsuit filed Tuesday in Sacramento Superior Court was not expected to stop the auction. The group was not seeking an injunction to halt the program immediately, said Denise Davis, a chamber spokeswoman.
The suit challenges the California Air Resources Board’s authority as stated under the state’s 2006 climate-change law, AB32, to sell the permits, called “allowances,” for the purpose of generating revenue for the state. It is also challenging the sale of allowances as an illegal tax, arguing that taxes need a twothirds vote by the Legislature.
“This action by an unelected state board to use regulatory statutes to raise tens of billions of dollars from taxpayers is unprecedented in our state’s history,” the chamber’s complaint said.
For the first two years of the program, large industrial emitters will receive 90 percent of their allowances for free in a soft start.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less