Greenhouse Gas Registriesand the

Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR)

Western Regional Air PartnershipInformation Sharing Meeting on Climate Change

Santa Fe, NM – August 25-26, 2005

Ken ColburnCenter for Climate Strategies (CCS)kcolburn@symbioticstrategies.com

617-784-6975

GHG Registry Evolution

NH1999

WI2000

CA2000

?

• Baseline protection (vs. “no good deed goes unpunished”)• Encourage early reductions• Start learning to quantify GHGs, do inventories, etc.• Multiple pollutants

Idea Spread, Not Surprisingly

• ED & Environment Resources Trust

• Emissions brokers (CO2e, Evolution, NatSource)

• Other states

• Also – EU National Registers under Kyoto

• Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR)

• CCX – a prospective “trading floor”

• “New & improved” 1605b (?)

… so has much confusion

Voluntary & Mandatory: Much Different Animals

• Voluntary: Registry provides a central, independent repository for credible information about emissions activities (e.g., for recognition, encouragement, baseline protection)

• Mandatory & Cap and Trade: Registry performs a critical data management and accounting role and serves as a ledger of all transactions; information = $ / enforcement

• NEG-ECP Plan called for developing a regional “emissions trading registry, and methods for baseline creation and credit generation” to – (a) provide baseline protection and – (b) gain experience in certifying credits and trading

regionally

• NESCAUM started on a regional voluntary registry in 2003, coordinating with major existing efforts– WRI / WBCSD GHG Protocol– CCAR

• RGGI changed all that (regulatory driver)– Voluntary, Mandatory, & Emissions/Allowances Tracking– Facility-level data; Enforcement quality data required– Data custody & storage issues; offsets, etc.

Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR)

Regional Greenhouse Gas Registry (RGGR)

GHG Registry (e.g., RGGR)

Voluntary

Cap & Trade (RGGI)Mandatory Reporting

Regulatory

Allowance TrackingEmissions Tracking

Projects(Offsets)

Entity-wide

Trying to fill three “Policy Spaces”

12 3

Mechanism: Multi-state MOU or through a new regional organization

Complex: Not to Be Entered Into Lightly (1)

• Function & Purpose • Design components (sectors, etc.)• Geographical boundaries (state, nation, globe)• Organizational boundaries (entity, facility,…)• Ownership / control

– Owner vs. operator– Minority ownership / consolidation

• Gases covered• Base year• Offsets / project-based (never been done)

Complex: Not to Be Entered Into Lightly (2)

• Operational boundaries – Sources covered– Direct & indirect emissions (upstream)

• Frequency of reporting• Verification (3rd party, certification)• De minimis emissions• Quantification requirements / tools• Software; data storage & management• Enforcement• Public access / transparency

Good News: Need Not Fear

• Lots of good information now, and “marketplace of ideas” about registries is rapidly converging

• EU Emission Trading Scheme will work out many remaining kinks – e.g., Legal, financial, & operational issues

• Compass points clearly toward mandatory U.S. programs (has design ramifications)– Bingaman-Domenici “Sense of the Senate” Resolution

• Quantification tools & approaches are rapidly becoming standardized (WRI, ISO, etc.)

• Not “rocket science”

• Concern: Interest may be eclipsing capacity– Not much pre-existing institutional capacity– Only significant funding source is the states themselves– Deadlines (e.g., CT – 1/1/2006) looming

• Advance or complicate federal action?– Both, but mostly spur it– Sources will seek greater consistency (e.g., federal)– Will help build toward a market– International linkages may impact intransigence– Future states will have precedent, rationale, and a better

path to follow

• Suggestion: Don’t look to 1605(b)…– Recent improvements, but still several fatal flaws

Registries: Other Thoughts

• Registry / Tracking capability is vital to the success of future regulatory climate efforts by states– Many non-regulatory efforts available– A key part of the GHG “learning curve”

• Bottom line for states: Proceed, but do so carefully and collaboratively– Complex but doable– Ideal topic for multi-state collaboration

Key Conclusions