Near Zero’s Danny Cullenward (who is also affiliated with the Carnegie Institution for Science) is quoted in a ClimateWire article article about attempts to extend—and possibly overhaul—California’s cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gases to keep it running, in some form, after 2020.
A key issue at hand, the article highlights, is that any extension of cap-and-trade beyond 2020 may require a two-thirds agreement in the California Legislature, to comply with Proposition 26, a 2010 ballot initiative that requires “a supermajority vote for any tax, even revenue-neutral ones,” as ClimateWire summarizes it. On this issue, the article quotes Cullenward:
“Short of a two-thirds supermajority vote, I don’t see any other legally viable path forward with a market structure,” said Danny Cullenward, a research associate at Stanford University’s Carnegie Institution for Science who advised state Sen. Bob Wieckowski (D) and state Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de León (D) on S.B. 775.
While observers agree that lawmakers have power over the program, there are differing views on the expectations market participants should have of them. “All of these players understand there is no market for their product without legislative reauthorization, and any of them that invested beyond the 2020 time frame took on that risk knowingly,” Cullenward said of the dismayed offset developers.
Read the full article, “Bid to reform cap and trade rests on its shaky legal foundation” by Debra Kahn, on the ClimateWire website (subscription may be required).