Notes and Sources

85.  The participating States are New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Maryland. See Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, web site www. rggi.org/states. 

86.  Western Climate Initiative, “Draft Design of the Regional Cap-and-Trade Program” (July 23, 2008), web site www.westernclimateinitiative.org/ ewebeditpro/items/O104F18808.PDF. 

87.  Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord, “Energy Security and Climate Stewardship Platform for the Midwest 2007,” web site www. midwesternaccord.org/Platform.pdf.

88.  State of California, Assembly Bill No. 32, “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” web site www.arb.ca.gov/cc/docs/ab32text.pdf. 

89. D. Samuelsohn, “Senate Emissions Bill Headed for Defeat,” Greenwire (June 5, 2008), web site www. eenews.net/eenewspm/2008/06/05/archive/1?terms= Boxer-Lieberman-Warner+ (subscription site). 

90.  L. Johnston, E. Hausman, A. Sommer, B. Biewald, T. Woolf, D. Schlissel, A. Roschelle, and D. White, Climate Change and Power: Carbon Dioxide Emissions Costs and Electricity Resource Planning (Cambridge, MA: Synapse Energy Economics, March 2, 2007), web site www.synapse-energy.com/Downloads/Synapse Paper.2007-03.0.Climate-Change-and-Power.A0009. pdf. 

91. See Morgan Stanley, “Leading Wall Street Banks Establish The Carbon Principles” (Press Release, February 4, 2008), web site www.morganstanley.com/ about/press/articles/6017.html. 

92. The LW110 case is based on S. 2191, which is the most recent GHG bill analyzed by EIA as of November 2008. The choice is not meant to imply that EIA supports or does not support S. 2191 or any other particular past or future proposal. 

93. Energy Information Administration, Energy and Economic Impacts of S. 2191, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2007, SR/OIAF/2008-01 (Washington, DC, April 2008), web site www.eia.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/s2191/index.html.