UPDATE – Oregon ETS hearings start as EJ groups, natural gas utilities hit back on programme design

Published 00:06 on February 9, 2019  /  Last updated at 15:02 on February 11, 2019  /  Americas, Canada, US  /  2 Comments

Environmental justice groups have urged Oregon legislators to curtail the use of free allowances and offsets in the state's proposed cap-and-trade programme, while natural gas utilities are advocating for greater allocations in line with their electric counterparts.

*Updates to clarify debate on investments in rural communities as relating to allowance proceeds, not offsets*

A Carbon Pulse subscription is required to read the full article. Subscribe today to access our unrivalled news and intelligence, as well as our new premium content. Click here for details.

We offer a FREE TRIAL of our subscription service and it only takes a minute to register. If you already have a Carbon Pulse account, login here.

2 Comments

  1. Hi Matt

    Thanks for the article covering the Oregon cap and trade debate, but I believe Mr. Ramirez’s concerns with the current bill is that it doesn’t have mandated allocation targets for auction revenue proceeds. He did use the words offsets, but, Chair Dembrow did clarify his concern was about auction proceed allocations during the Q&A.

    Additionally, Mr. Ramirez actually praised offsets in his testimony. He was referring to the TMF Biofuels Dairy Digester project in Boardman, OR, which has been producing CCOs, and noted that offset revenues were being used to help fund the construction of farm labor housing at the dairy.

    I appreciate your reporting on this issue, but it is important to note that EJ groups in Oregon are not universally opposed to offsets. Those who work in rural communities or are rural-based such as native tribes are actually supportive of offsets and the revenues they can bring to their communities, which are disadvantaged.

    Sheldon Zakreski
    The Climate Trust

    • Hi Sheldon, thank you for the comment.

      You are correct in pointing out that Mr. Ramirez’ concern related to the use of auction proceeds and not offset proceeds – I missed that in the Q&A session. I have updated accordingly above to reflect that.

Comment

We use cookies to improve your website experience and to analyse our traffic. We also share non-personally identifiable information about your use of our site with our analytics partners. By continuing to use our site, you agree to this. More information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close