概要

As different statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction policies continue to emerge in the United States, more and more businesses are calling on the federal government to enact a single, uniform policy. The prospect of complementary policies between different levels of government—as well as the potential for conflicting and even duplicative regulations—could have significant implications for business. This installment of WRI’s “Bottom Line” series explores the fundamental debates about, and potential outcomes of, different degrees of state and federal policy action.

执行摘要

单一的联邦气候变化政策的理由是什么？必威官网是真的吗

一项联邦政策的倡导者为所有受该政策影响的企业寻求一个公平的竞争环境，这将在所有50个州中统一法规。同样，公司更容易遵守单一法规，而不是遵守不同司法管辖区的许多法规。鉴于并非所有州都会制定气候政策，因此强大的联邦政策可以比仅由国家主导的政策行必威官网是真的吗动实现更大的排放。

允许各州维护和制定自己的气候变化政策的理由是什么？必威官网是真的吗

各州可以作为制定新的创新政策的实验室，历史上比联邦政府在设计和实施新的政策思想方面的行为更快。国家政策创新也被视为推动联邦政府采取行动的动力。各州可以量身定制政策，以适应其特定情况，例如地理和自然资源，并且可以说，他们比联邦政府更了解其独特的利益相关者利益。

国家和联邦政府的联合政策行动的理由是什么？

Most energy and environmental issues are currently handled jointly by state and federal government in order to capitalize on their respective strengths (see above), and a cooperative partnership on climate change policy may be similarly beneficial. For example, the federal government may establish a minimum standard that applies to all states but which allows certain states to exceed that standard and push for greater environmental protection if they choose. Such cooperation may provide businesses with a more level playing field than a scenario where states act alone. The history of U.S. environmental policy suggests that some shared role between levels of government is the most likely outcome for climate change policy.

全面的联邦气候变化政策是否意味着企业不会受到州或地方政府的必威官网是真的吗监管？

目前，各州有权规范温室气体排放。这可能会根据联邦气候法规的编写方式而改变。必威官网是真的吗For example, federal legislation could explicitly preempt the states’ authority to regulate GHGs through specific mechanisms such as cap-and-trade while allowing them to regulate GHGs through other policy mechanisms such as emissions performance standards for certain types of sources (e.g. limiting the amount of GHGs a vehicle may emit per mile). Federal preemption could also be more expansive by prohibiting states from implementing any policy that regulates GHG emissions regardless of the policy mechanism, or it could go even further and preempt states’ authority to impose policies that directly or indirectly regulate GHGs (e.g. renewable portfolio standards, land use policies where some other activity such as renewable generation is regulated but the result includes GHG reductions). Conversely, federal legislation could explicitly retain states’ full authority to implement and enforce GHG emission regulations. Under nearly any of these scenarios business could be subject to additional state and local regulations, though to differing degrees. The one exception would be full preemption of all state and local policies that directly or indirectly regulate GHG emissions. The ultimate outcome will depend on state and federal legislation that has yet to be enacted. However, it is unlikely that states will be prevented from implementing policies that reduce GHGs from sources not regulated by the federal government.

跨司法管辖区的多种政策是否存在不寻常的存在？

否。企业经常遵守多层规则和法规。例如，税法通常适用于地方，州和联邦一级，此类法律因州而异。对于几乎所有政策领域，包括能源和环境政策，也是如此。例如，联邦氮氧化物（NOX）排放的联邦帽和贸易计划要求某些州参与该计划，但允许每个州都可以实施该计划，因为它认为适合指定的准则。这导致了一项统一联邦计划的各州之间的不同要求。如果联邦计划被广泛认为足以解决有关的问题，则其他州政策可能不太可能浮出水面。例如，拟议的联邦清洁空气州际统治（最近被联邦法院拒绝）将建立二氧化硫（SO2）排放的上限，该排放通常被州认为足够严格。在法院诉讼之前的计划和实施阶段，在法院诉讼之前，没有国家发行的减少要求，该要求将超出拟议的联邦法规，尽管他们有充分的权力这样做。

联邦政策多久导致联邦政府对州和地方政府的全面抢先？

很少。联邦政府采用单一标准的某种形式的部分先发制人更典型。例如，联邦政府维持国家能源和设备的国家能源效率标准。任何州都可以针对不受联邦政府监管的设备实施标准。如果国家被能源部授予豁免，则允许各州发布超出联邦监管设备要求的标准。完全先发制人的一个例子与商业高级核废料的存储和处置有关，这是联邦政府的唯一权限。

Can the presence of state policies offer opportunities for businesses?

国家政策可以为企业带来机会和挑战。在机遇方面，可再生能源激励措施和授权使企业能够减少温室气体排放，并利用新的尖端绿色电力技术，从而产生诸如降低化石燃料价格波动的脆弱性之类的好处。国家政策还促进了新的可再生能源行业的创建。当企业面临遵守不同国家政策的额外成本时，就会出现挑战。但是，如前所述，这不是环境或能源政策的特殊性。公司经常面对从州到州和国家到国家开展业务的不同成本，以遵守广泛的政策法规和税收措施。

参考和致谢

其他参考
致谢

WRI要感谢我们的许多内部和外部审稿人提供有关底线系列中各种问题草案的反馈。WRI还希望感谢以下支持我们的气候和商业参与活动的基础，并帮助使本系列成为可能：必威官网是真的吗

  • 艾米丽·霍尔·特里米基金会
  • Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund
  • 罗伯逊基金会
  • 英国全球机会基金
  • Westwind Foundation