Topic: us policy

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.

GHG emissions compliance costs should be minimal for 10 of the 13 subsectors eligible for free emissions allowances in 2016, in WRI’s view.

GHG emissions compliance costs should be minimal for 10 of the 13 subsectors eligible for free emissions allowances in 2016, in WRI’s view.

The impact of energy-related costs varies under the three EIA scenarios.

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 and Standard & Poor

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.