The US biofuel mandate as a substitute for carbon cap-and-trade

B-Tier
Journal: Energy Policy
Year: 2018
Volume: 113
Issue: C
Pages: 368-375

Authors (4)

Thompson, Wyatt (not in RePEc) Johansson, Robert (Government of the United State...) Meyer, Seth (not in RePEc) Whistance, Jarrett (not in RePEc)

Score contribution per author:

0.503 = (α=2.01 / 4 authors) × 1.0x B-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

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.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:eee:enepol:v:113:y:2018:i:c:p:368-375
Journal Field
Energy
Author Count
4
Added to Database
2026-01-25