May 22, 2008
S.F. Bay Area Passes Carbon Tax
The San Francisco Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s board of directors voted overwhelmingly (15-1) to charge area companies 4.4 cents per ton of carbon dioxide they emit, a first for the U.S.,The Associated Press reports.
The new rules, which impose fees on businesses for emitting greenhouse gasses, are expected to generate $1.1 million in the first year to help pay for programs to measure the region’s emissions and develop ways to reduce them. They are set to take effect July 1.
Of the more than 2,500 businesses that will be required to pay the proposed fees, the biggest payers will be seven power plants and oil refineries that would have to pay more than $50,000 a year. The majority of businesses would pay less than $1, the district estimates.
Shelly Sullivan, who heads the AB32 Implementation Group, a coalition of business groups working with state regulators to implement California’s global warming law, says the program will make business in the Bay Area less competitive. Others question whether or not the Bay Area Air Quality Management District even has the authority to impose fees on greenhouse gas emissions.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District proposed the charge in February.
Last summer, as part of the Western Climate Initiative, California was one of six western states and two Canadian provinces who pledged (PDF) to work together to cut greenhouse gas emissions 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.
California’s landmark legislation AB32, requires the state to cut its emissions 25 percent by 2020.
Advertisers
Make sustainability part of your strategy.
Get equipped at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>
Unclear about the EPA's new GHG Rule?
Learn how it could affect your business. >>
EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st
CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>
Best Practices: Product Environmental Compliance
How to achieve compliance at a significantly lower cost. Download the full report. >>
Join the Discussion
Recent Daily News [ see all ]
- 11/20/2009
- 11/19/2009
- 11/18/2009
- Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency
- EPA Is One Step Closer to New Ship Emissions Standards
- European Paper Industry Cuts CO2 Emissions by 42% since 1990
- CDP Launches Water Disclosure Project
- Whirlpool Cuts Water Use by Nearly 22% from 2004 to 2008
- National Grid Again Rejects High Costs of Offshore Wind
- California City’s Green Building Ordinance Applies to Commercial Buildings
- Agilent To Save $3.5M Over 10 Years With Solar
- S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
- Texas, China Wind Partners May Build U.S. Factory to Appease Critical Lawmaker
- Volvo, Mack Engines First to Meet 2010 EPA Emissions Standards
- Around the Web – Nike, Google, Nissan, Bush’s Green Library, WWF
- Fossil Fuel Emissions Rose 29% since 2000
- SEC Charges Four in ‘Green’ Investment Ponzi Scheme
- No Sunny Skies for Two Solar Projects in Texas, California
- Canada Delays GHG Emissions Regs, Russia Ups Emissions Cuts
- News Corp. Taps Hara for Energy Efficiency, Environmental Management
- Rising Sea Levels Would Hit U.S. East Coast Hardest
- Building an Energy-Efficient Data Center Using Virtualization Technology
- Trade Group on EPA Chemical Regs: ‘If Everything is a Priority, Then Nothing is a Priority’
- A/V Equipment Gets New Energy Star Requirements
- By Scaling Back Catalogs, JC Penney to Save 30% on Paper
- Around the Web – Starbucks, EcoFactor, UPS, Brownfields, Eco-Labels
- Subaru Touts Energy & Environmental Initiatives
- U.S., China Partner on Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency
- Green Buildings Do Double Duty: Reduce Energy Use, Lower Financial Risk
- UK to Ease Rules for On-Site Renewable Energy Installations
- Intel Eyes Wind, Electric Cars
- Nike Tops Annual Climate Action Scores
- Iranian Tanker Firm to Cut Fuel Use 28%
- Corporate Jetsetters Can be Carbon Offsetters
- USPS Energy Use Down 9% From 2005 to 2008
- From Solar Applications to Christmas, LEDs Light the Night
- EPA May Regulate Sulfur Dioxide Emissions on Hourly Basis
- MITEI: Sustainable Energy & Terawatt-Scale Photovoltaics
- Around the Web – Health Care & Energy, Shell, NBC
Charts [ see all ]
Popular Topics
Energy Efficiency
Data Center
Emissions
Facilities
Electricity
Sustainability
Water
Supply Chain
Efficiency
Green Marketing
Strategy & Leadership
Research
Fleets & Transportation
Carbon Finance
Conventional Energy
Clean Energy
Waste & Recycling
Paper & Packaging
Policy & Law
Utilities
Construction
Comments and Discussions
Trade Association on Trade Group on EPA Chemical Regs: ‘If Everything is a Priority, Then Nothing is a Priority’
"Seriously… that..."
Gary Markowitz on Supermarkets Tackle Emissions Reductions, Fuel Efficiency
"Supermarkets waste over 10 percent of their energy through improper..."
peter in ireland on Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency
"Governor Schwarzenegger is shooting himself in the foot! 1...."
Environmental Leader on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"The survey respondents (the PDF report mentions 4,000 respondents in 38..."
Jake on UPS Trying New Hydraulic Hybrid Trucks
"A point of clarification: the Reuters press release referenced herein reports that 20 UPS will purchase..."
Custom Organic Shirts on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"90% of North Americans believe it is urgent to get a global climate..."
peter dublin on California City’s Green Building Ordinance Applies to Commercial Buildings
"Why energy efficiebnt regulation on buildings –..."




Reader Comments
Carbon tax for corporate and NGO welfare?
Carlie Peters | May 22nd, 2008
So to encourage power companies and refineries to clean up their acts, so to speak, they gouge them so that they don’t have that money to use in developing cleaner technologies. Very clever, San Francisco. I can hear the screams now when they have another power crisis and the cost of oil goes up again. Do these people not have a brain among them? Everyone wants clean air, but rational thought would better serve the cause than the typical knee jerk reactions of the greener-than-thou SF council.
Glennis | May 23rd, 2008
Should Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger consider a “fee” on corn fuel ethanol use? * Lower price for food, gas, water, beer, cleaner air… and… funds for the budget from oil profit.
Charlie Peters | May 24th, 2008
…and do what with the fees?
B Madsen | June 3rd, 2008