Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEllerman, A. Dennyen_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-04-03T17:05:36Z
dc.date.available2009-04-03T17:05:36Z
dc.date.issued2003en_US
dc.identifier2003-009en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/45002
dc.description.abstractThis paper provides preliminary answers to four questions concerning the behavior of agents operating under the SO2 Allowance Trading Program that could not be adequately answered until several years' data on compliance behavior in the final Phase II could be observed. The four questions are: 1. How is abatement distributed geographically when all fossil-fuel-fired electricity generating units are included? 2. Will agents draw down the accumulated Phase I bank, as expected and more or less efficiently, during Phase II? 3. Is there any evidence that the failure to endow new generating units with allowances constitutes a barrier to entry? 4. What can be said about the cost of the SO2 Allowance Trading Program in Phase II when all units are included and when it is fully phased in?en_US
dc.format.extent23 pen_US
dc.publisherMIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Researchen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesMIT-CEEPR (Series) ; 03-009WP.en_US
dc.titleLessons from Phase 2 compliance with the U.S. Acid Rain Programen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.oclc53192323en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record