{"id":2050,"date":"2010-05-20T12:53:56","date_gmt":"2010-05-20T17:53:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/?p=2050"},"modified":"2010-05-20T12:53:56","modified_gmt":"2010-05-20T17:53:56","slug":"why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/","title":{"rendered":"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away"},"content":{"rendered":"

In his insightful post<\/a>, Rob Stavins makes two key points regarding the allocation of emission allowances under climate legislation like that introduced last week by Senators Kerry and Lieberman.<\/p>\n

First, Stavins addresses head-on the concerns that some progressives have toward the allocation provisions in the bill, asking in the title of his post: \u201cIs the Kerry-Lieberman Allowance Allocation a Corporate Give-Away?\u201d \u00a0To answer this question, Stavins carries out a careful breakdown of the allowance allocation in the Kerry-Lieberman bill.\u00a0 He shows that the vast majority of emission allowances (more than 80% over the duration of the bill) \u2014 goes to energy consumers and public purposes (including deficit reduction).\u00a0 That hardly sounds like a windfall to big corporations!\u00a0 Indeed, if you add it up, the largest fraction of allowance value (43% in total, according to my calculations) goes to households, through an energy refund to low-income consumers, a tax credit to working families, a universal trust fund for all Americans, and allowances that are allocated to local electricity and gas utilities for the benefit of their customers.<\/p>\n

As Stavins’s calculations illustrate, what matters most in terms of allocation is not whether the allowances are auctioned or given away for free, but who receives the value. \u00a0(For example, of the allowance value that is directed to households, about four-fifths comes as auction revenue, while the remainder is from the allowances allocated for free to local utilities.)<\/p>\n

Even so, some progressives worry that free allocation is at odds with cutting emissions.\u00a0 After all, if you give emitters something for free, doesn’t that eliminate the “price on carbon” that creates an economic incentive to cut carbon emissions?\u00a0 The answer, actually, is “no.”<\/p>\n

Here’s where Stavins’s second point comes in.\u00a0 As he explains, it is a basic result of economics that even when allowances are distributed for free, they will still have a value (since they can be sold on a market). In economic terms, each time a company uses an allowance, there is an \u201copportunity cost\u201d involved \u2014 the foregone profit they could have gotten from selling the allowance instead.\u00a0 As a result, companies will still have a strong economic incentive to find cost-effective ways to reduce their carbon emissions \u2014 so that the economic performance of the bill is basically unaffected.\u00a0 (It’s also worth pointing out that the environmental performance of the bill is also unaffected, since that is determined by the cap \u2014 not by how allowances are allocated.)<\/p>\n

To put the same point a bit differently, the value of allowances doesn’t depend on how they are allocated.\u00a0 Rather, allowances have value because they are in scarce supply \u2014 thanks to the cap on emissions.\u00a0 The tighter is the cap, the greater is the scarcity, and the higher is the value of allowances, all else equal.<\/p>\n

Of course, there are a few nuances worth noting.\u00a0 First, from a strictly economic point of view, the best use of allowance value would be to use it to lower distortionary taxes on labor and capital, giving the overall economy an added boost.\u00a0 However, getting such a “double dividend” requires not just auctioning the allowances, but using the revenue in a specific way to cut other taxes \u2014 something that has yet to generate significant political momentum.\u00a0 In other words, acknowledging the possibility of a double dividend doesn’t undermine the main point that what matters is how the value of allowances is allocated, not simply whether allowances are auctioned or freely allocated.<\/p>\n

Second, some ways of allocating allowances can<\/em> affect incentives.\u00a0 This can cut both ways.\u00a0 In theory, using allowance value to reduce electricity rates can undermine incentives to conserve energy; this suggests that it would be preferable to compensate households for higher energy costs by sending them a lump-sum rebate rather than cutting their marginal price.\u00a0 In other contexts, allowance allocation is deliberately designed to affect incentives.\u00a0 For example, energy-intensive, trade-exposed manufacturers are given allocations that are tied to their output and to the average emissions intensity of their sector.\u00a0 As research by Carolyn Fischer at Resources for the Future<\/a> and others has shown, such “output-based rebates” manage to preserve the incentive to reduce emissions, while helping to keep manufacturing in this country and prevent “emissions leakage” to countries without a carbon price.<\/p>\n

The bottom line is that the distinction between free allocation and auction makes little difference for the environmental or economic performance of the bill.\u00a0 That’s a key point well worth keeping in mind in the coming debates over climate legislation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In his insightful post, Rob Stavins makes two key points regarding the allocation of emission allowances under climate legislation like that introduced last week by Senators Kerry and Lieberman. First, Stavins addresses head-on the concerns that some progressives have toward the allocation provisions in the bill, asking in the title of his post: \u201cIs the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[108,43],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-2050","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-climate-change-legislation","category-economics"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nWhy the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away - Climate 411<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away - Climate 411\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In his insightful post, Rob Stavins makes two key points regarding the allocation of emission allowances under climate legislation like that introduced last week by Senators Kerry and Lieberman. First, Stavins addresses head-on the concerns that some progressives have toward the allocation provisions in the bill, asking in the title of his post: \u201cIs the ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Climate 411\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-05-20T17:53:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Nat Keohane\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Nat Keohane\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Nat Keohane\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/87d04a89b1b46574862bb536773d11ca\"},\"headline\":\"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-20T17:53:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":758,\"commentCount\":1,\"articleSection\":[\"Climate Change Legislation\",\"Economics\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/\",\"name\":\"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away - Climate 411\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-20T17:53:56+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/87d04a89b1b46574862bb536773d11ca\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/2010\\\/05\\\/20\\\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/\",\"name\":\"Climate 411\",\"description\":\"Blogging the science and policy of global warming\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/87d04a89b1b46574862bb536773d11ca\",\"name\":\"Nat Keohane\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8de630d707fed2cbef6876318f8626c0d4264b580fc399b28bd29dfdfe314ca4?s=96&d=mm&r=g2694fbd4f5aa56f94ec43f22f8bd7409\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8de630d707fed2cbef6876318f8626c0d4264b580fc399b28bd29dfdfe314ca4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8de630d707fed2cbef6876318f8626c0d4264b580fc399b28bd29dfdfe314ca4?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Nat Keohane\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.edf.org\\\/people\\\/nathaniel-keohane\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/climate411\\\/author\\\/nkeohane\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away - Climate 411","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away - Climate 411","og_description":"In his insightful post, Rob Stavins makes two key points regarding the allocation of emission allowances under climate legislation like that introduced last week by Senators Kerry and Lieberman. First, Stavins addresses head-on the concerns that some progressives have toward the allocation provisions in the bill, asking in the title of his post: \u201cIs the ...","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/","og_site_name":"Climate 411","article_published_time":"2010-05-20T17:53:56+00:00","author":"Nat Keohane","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Nat Keohane","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/"},"author":{"name":"Nat Keohane","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#\/schema\/person\/87d04a89b1b46574862bb536773d11ca"},"headline":"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away","datePublished":"2010-05-20T17:53:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/"},"wordCount":758,"commentCount":1,"articleSection":["Climate Change Legislation","Economics"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/","name":"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away - Climate 411","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-05-20T17:53:56+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#\/schema\/person\/87d04a89b1b46574862bb536773d11ca"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/2010\/05\/20\/why-the-american-power-act-is-not-a-corporate-give-away\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Why the American Power Act is Not a Corporate Give-Away"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/","name":"Climate 411","description":"Blogging the science and policy of global warming","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/#\/schema\/person\/87d04a89b1b46574862bb536773d11ca","name":"Nat Keohane","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8de630d707fed2cbef6876318f8626c0d4264b580fc399b28bd29dfdfe314ca4?s=96&d=mm&r=g2694fbd4f5aa56f94ec43f22f8bd7409","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8de630d707fed2cbef6876318f8626c0d4264b580fc399b28bd29dfdfe314ca4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8de630d707fed2cbef6876318f8626c0d4264b580fc399b28bd29dfdfe314ca4?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Nat Keohane"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.edf.org\/people\/nathaniel-keohane"],"url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/author\/nkeohane\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2050","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/29"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2050"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2050\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2050"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2050"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2050"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/climate411\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=2050"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}