The US biofuel mandate as a substitute for carbon cap-and-trade
Seth Meyer and
Energy Policy, 2018, vol. 113, issue C, 368-375
Environmental economists might recommend a cap-and-trade program as a good way to lower emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), but US carbon cap-and-trade legislation was proposed and failed to become law. Instead, the biofuel use mandate is the primary existing GHG reduction program in the United States. The mandate effectively requires a rising amount of GHG abatement each year, but allows regulated parties to buy and sell credits to meet annual obligations. Although many aspects of the biofuel mandate look similar to a cap-and-trade program, there are additional requirements, such as feedstock eligibility limitations and waivers. The existence of the mandates is presumably conditional on all the legal requirements, but these conditions represent a departure from a strict GHG cap-and-trade program.
Keywords: Biofuel; Ethanol; U.S. biofuel mandate; RFS; GHG; Cap-and-trade (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:enepol:v:113:y:2018:i:c:p:368-375
Access Statistics for this article
Energy Policy is currently edited by N. France
More articles in Energy Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().