Organisation Name
Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA)
InfluenceMap Query
Emissions Trading
Data Source
CEO Messaging
 
 

Score for this Data / Query Cell

0.61

InfluenceMap has researched and collated the following pieces of evidence associated with the data source and query indicated above. Extraordinary information is indicated by a coloured flag in the upper right corner. Evidence items in order of data inputted with exceptional items first.

 

Opposing emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Advocating for regulators not to support measures which may improve cap-and-trade or its effectiveness (WSPA President, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, letter to Air Resources Board Chairwoman, Mary Nichols, August 2014)

Extract from Source:

As you know, the Western States Petroleum Association believes this regulatory expansion will have a significant impact on the fuels markets and potentially consumers, most of whom are unaware of the change and its impact on fuel costs. [...] Expanding the program to fuels is a major, unprecedented step. No other jurisdiction in the world has attempted to regulate gasoline and diesel markets through a cap and trade mechanism. That is why we are recommending the program be delayed – so that all Californians can be properly educated, obligated parties can understand how the program is intended to work, and appropriate controls are in place to prevent unnecessary disruptions to markets and fuel supplies. [...] This program, unless delayed or modified, will have a major impact on California fuel markets and very possibly, consumers. We believe the State has an obligation to Californians to provide widely available, accurate and consistent information.

Created: 17/09/2015 Last edited: 29/09/2016

 

Not supporting emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Evidence suggests support for weaker emissions trading policy in California (WSPA President, Catherine Rheis-Boyd, Oregon Business, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

There is a trading component to the standard. You support market mechanisms? Our organization supports market mechanisms like cap and trade. A cap and trade says you have some flexibility. It’s not a single regulation on a single industry. So you support a cap and trade program to regulate carbon emissions? We would support discussing a cap and trade. You can have a well-designed cap and trade and a poorly designed cap and trade. It could be designed worse than the low carbon fuel standard. If Oregon goes down the cap and trade route we hope they will take look at low carbon fuels standard. Because otherwise it is duplicative. [...] You lobby for carbon offsets as key to a cap and trade emissions reductions strategy. But California is pulling back on global offsets in favor of local pollution control programs. Offsets are the most effective cost containment measure. Why would you want to limit them? The only reason is if you consider CO2 a local pollutant, which it is not. If you have an offset protocol that has been approved, why wouldn’t you want to use them? California said we’re going to move offsets from 8% of emissions reductions to 4% and maybe go up to 6%. That's too low. I think offsets are the most innovative part of cap and trade — it’s getting at places where people can’t make reductions. Isn’t that the point? I hope Oregon takes on offsets and tells California they should do more. Oregon’s going to set the offset standard.

Created: 01/08/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Supporting emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Evidence suggests support for emissions trading (WSPA President, Reheis-Boyd, Twitter, September 2016)

Extract from Source:

Concerned some say cap-and-trade should go away. Also alarming when moving to command & control and away from market mechanisms. #climateone (Twitter, September 2016)

Created: 29/09/2016 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Strongly supporting emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting the California cap and trade system (WSPA President, Catherine Rheis-Boyd, San Francisco Chronicle, June 2017)

Extract from Source:

California consumers and businesses are frequently reminded of these effects as they deal with energy prices that are among the nation’s highest. If there’s an unintended consequence of the Golden State’s commitment to aggressive climate change policies, it may be that it puts our businesses at a competitive disadvantage and leaves our consumers and communities to bear higher energy costs. That’s why it is important that the Legislature heed the governor’s call and reauthorize improved market-based programs such as the state’s cap-and-trade auctions this year. Cap-and-trade is acknowledged as an environmentally effective and economically efficient tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions; it must remain the keystone program for meeting our climate-change goals.

Created: 07/06/2017 Last edited: 07/06/2017