If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now
California State Capitol

Court Upholds California Carbon Auctions

California State CapitolA Superior Court judge has rejected a legal challenge to California’s carbon auctions, a key piece of the state’s cap-and-trade program.

The California Chamber of Commerce and Pacific Legal Foundation, on behalf of a dozen clients including Morning Star Packing Company and Dalton Trucking, had filed lawsuits in Sacramento Superior Court to block the carbon allowances, which require companies to bid money in exchange for emitting CO2.

The groups argued the permits constitute an illegal tax — the first four auctions have raised about $396 million for the state — that wasn’t approved by a supermajority vote by the California legislature and should be free to companies covered by the program.

California’s emissions reduction law, AB 32, was approved by a simple majority vote in 2006.

In Superior Court Judge Timothy M. Frawley’s decision, dated Nov. 12, he said the business groups’ arguments were not persuasive: “Although AB 32 does not explicitly authorize the sale of allowances, it specifically delegates to [California Air Resources Board] the discretion to adopt a cap-and-trade program and to ‘design’ a system of distribution of emissions allowances.”

The Pacific Legal Foundation on Thursday said it would file an appeal. The California Chamber of Commerce indicated it would follow suit. The court’s decision “is ripe for review and reversal by the appellate court,” Allan Zaremberg, president and chief executive of the California Chamber of Commerce, told Reuters.

Photo Credit: California state capitol building flags via Shutterstock

Embrace Big Data
Sponsored By: UL EHS Sustainability

OSHA Written HazCom Plan Template
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

Environmental Leader Product and Project Awards 2016
Sponsored By: Environmental Leader

Become a More Effective EHS Leader for Your Retail Business
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS


4 thoughts on “Court Upholds California Carbon Auctions

  1. Now U.S. citizens are forced to fund the Communist Party in Red China. All Red China companies are at least 51% owned by the Communist Party.
    Here are some laws Dougie lies about:
    California AB32 (effective 1/1/2012)
    2020: reduce to 1990 levels
    2050: reduce to 80% below 1990 levels

    Lieberman – McCain Bill S. 280
    2012: reduce to 2004 levels
    2020: reduce to 1990 levels
    2050: reduce to 60% below 1990 levels

    Low Carbon Economy Act of 2007 S. 1766 (targets decline in each calendar year):
    2012: 6,652 MtCO2e
    2020: 6,188 MtCO2e (approximately 2006 emissions levels)
    2030: 4,819 MtCO2e (equal to 1990 emissions levels)
    2050: 2,475 MtCO2e (60% below 2006 emissions levels, if president approves)

    Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008 S.2192
    2030: ~$0.53 increase in the price of gasoline
    2050: ~$1.40 increase in the price of gasoline

    The Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act of 2009 S. 1733 &
    American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 – H.R. 2454
    2050: 83% below 2005

    Cap and Trade bill (if passed, is expected to)
    2020: reduce to 17 percent below 2005 levels

    E.P.A. (CO2 added as “pollutant”)
    2016: 35.5 mpg corporate fleet average fuel economy (light duty trucks to be included)
    2025: 54.5 mpg corporate fleet average fuel economy

    Dougie, fear not, this will all be deleted shortly, just like our last 2 oer 3 exchanges.

  2. And now we see that CO2Good has been further debunked by the CA Superior Court. The lawsuit “argued the permits constitute an illegal tax.” And guess what – the Superior Court rejected that legal challenge.

    Guess I wasn’t the only one to see through the type of falsehoods being advocated by CO2Good and others.

  3. And this type of posting by CO2Good is likewise a rich source of amusement: “Now U.S. citizens are forced to fund the Communist Party in Red China. All Red China companies are at least 51% owned by the Communist Party.”
    Nevermind that the article contains absolutely no reference to China, the communist party, or even to Chinese companies. No, such considerations apparently do not limit CO2Good’s imagination …

  4. Most of the ‘laws’ listed by CO2Good above are not relevant to any portion of this discussion. As I have noted elsewhere, all but the first one actually come from debates and bills at the federal level – not CA. And I didn’t lie about any of them; I merely noted the difference between a federal origin and a CA origin.

Leave a Comment

Translate »