Controlling costs are key to meeting climate goals

06/04/2014 12:06 PM

06/04/2014 6:21 PM

Re "Carbon plan spotlights state" (Capitol & California, June 3): The article about the U.S. EPA's new carbon rules makes it seem as if the California Chamber of Commerce opposes the state's cap and trade measure. Wrong. We support a market-based approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, since it will minimize job loss. In fact, we asked that it be included in Assembly Bill 32 of 2006. The cap reduces carbon emissions while the trading mechanism allows companies to find the most cost effective means to meet it. Unfortunately, the California Air Resources Board layered an illegal carbon tax on top of cap and trade. The Legislature never authorized this tax and the tax is the only focus of our litigation. We don't seek repeal of cap and trade or AB 32 as the article suggests. California's carbon reduction efforts can only be a success if others follow our lead. This won't happen by adding more costs that aren't necessary to achieve AB32 goals.

-- Allan Zaremberg, California Chamber of Commerce president and chief executive officer, Sacramento

Editor's Choice Videos


Join the Discussion

The Sacramento Bee is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Terms of Service