If passed, the American Power Act (APA) would require companies to hold permits to emit GHGs for all emissions from
facilities emitting more than 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) or equivalent gre
WRI and Standard & Poor’s were unable to conduct a full assessment of credit quality per subsector
under EPA regulation because of limited information on the EPA’s anticipated regulatory approach
The criteria for determining free allowances may change in future climate policy proposals, including the possibility of not distributing any free allowances to industry.
In Standard & Poor’s view, the profitability of commodity chemicals production is highly correlated
to energy and raw materials prices because these costs often make up the majority of a chemical
Using the EIA policy scenarios and projections of the American Power Act (APA), WRI analyzed the potential additional
costs or savings as a result of climate policy.
WRI and Standard & Poor’s examined the possible credit implications of the policy scenarios for 13 of the most greenhouse gas-intensive chemicals manufacturing subsectors.
WRI believes that 2016 is likely the earliest year that future EPA regulation would cover GHGs from
existing chemical facilities. The form of regulation is unclear.
This study, conducted with Standard & Poors Rating Services, examines how climate change policy drivers could be incorporated into the evaluation of credit quality. It analyzes two types of federal climate policy scenarios – (1) a market-based GHG emissions reduction policy as approximated by the American Power Act (APA), and (2) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) – in the context of 13 energy-intensive chemicals subsectors.
Kirsty Jenkinson talks about how New Ventures, WRI’s center for environmental entrepreneurship, helps environmentally-focused small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in emerging markets compete in a global economy.
This working paper series summarizes key innovations and challenges of the Clean Technology Fund. It analyzes the investment plans that the Fund has endorsed to date, and makes the case for greater emphasis on institutional capacity and governance in program design.