Entire Book - Southwest Consortium for Environmental Research ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Designing a Transborder Trading Scheme monitoring and enforcement by Mexico argues for allocating liability to U.S. buyers. Under this scheme, violation by Mexican sellers would instigate enforcement action by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and/or state officials. Thus, U.S. buyers would face a similar incentive for compliance as with a strictly domestic transaction. HARMONIZATION Harmonization refers to the establishment of identical standards in two jurisdictions. Many observers point to differences in environmental standards between Mexico and the United States as a reason why transborder emissions trading will not work. Will Mexican officials, for example, allow enforcement of standards in excess of those required under Mexican laws? The question is, Which ambient air standard should be enforced, U.S. or Mexican? As indicated in Chapter III, Mexican and U.S. ambient air quality standards are similar. Both U.S. and Mexican law authorize the establishment of atmospheric concentration standards. These have been developed for the six criteria pollutants, ozone precursors (volatile organic compounds [VOC] and nitrogen oxides [NO x ]), and various hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The guiding principle in setting standards in both countries is the protection of human health. When the standards do differ, it is not necessarily true that U.S. standards are stricter than Mexican standards. The United States imposes a one-hour standard on carbon monoxide (CO); Mexico does not, but Mexico does impose a stricter eighthour standard. For NO x , the Mexican standard is stricter, but Mexico has no standard for the annual arithmetic average, while the United States does impose an annual standard. The United States and Mexico have the same standard for PM 10 . Mexico has a stricter one-hour ozone standard but has no eight-hour standard. Mexico has a stricter 24-hour standard for SO 2 but has the same annual standard as the United States. Mexico has no standard for PM 2.5 , while the United States has no standard for total suspended particulates. 119
Improving Transboundary Air Quality with Binational Emission Reduction Credit Trading A solution to conflicts in standards is to treat the emissions trading program as if it were a domestic transaction in the purchaser’s home country, in essence where the credit is being applied, with the exception of using a third-party monitor to certify compliance in the other country. That is, if an ERC generated in Mexico is purchased by a U.S. firm, the purchaser would be allowed to use the ERC as an offset only if the transaction met the requirements for a strictly domestic U.S. trade. Mexican officials would have no active involvement in the transaction. This requires the least amount of international negotiation, yet allows use of emissions trading to achieve environmental goals at a low cost. An important point in this regard is that the selling country always benefits from emissions trading while the purchasing country only benefits if the emission reduction actually occurs. To see this, consider the situation after a trade. Emissions are lower and the selling firm has generated revenues that otherwise would not have been generated. The selling country enjoys both a stronger environment and financial gain. The buying country benefits from the improved environment, but partially offsetting this is the financial loss arising from the payment to the seller. Thus, the seller should favor any trade that the buyer is willing to authorize. A complicating issue of harmonization is the effect of trading on employment. A wide variety of issues are considered in setting ambient air quality and point-source emission standards, as well as in determining the level of enforcement. Not the least of these issues is the impact of environmental standards on employment. Tighter standards may have a negative impact on employment and jobs. Such job loss has a different impact in a developing country like Mexico than it does in a developed country like the United States. Mexico, like other developing countries, has a limited social safety net so job loss has more serious consequences for a Mexican citizen than for a U.S. citizen. Under these circumstances, it is understandable that Mexico would place a greater value on preserving jobs when evaluating environmental regulation than the United States would. Job loss is not necessarily a byproduct of emission reduction, but certainly job loss can happen. When job loss occurs as an outcome of a U.S. firm’s purchase of an ERC from a Mexican emitter, Mexican officials may not want such transactions to be consum- 120
Page 1 and 2:
THE SCERP MISSION The Southwest Con
Page 3 and 4:
Authors SCERP Monograph Series, no.
Page 5 and 6:
Published by San Diego State Univer
Page 8:
Contents Foreword v Prefacio ix Pre
Page 11 and 12:
Improving Transboundary Air Quality
Page 14 and 15:
Prefacio “Si vale la pena tener u
Page 16:
Prefacio pudiera ser difícil, cost
Page 19 and 20:
Page 22 and 23:
I Introduction THE VIEW FROM EL PAS
Page 24 and 25:
Introduction Resource Conservation
Page 26 and 27:
Introduction approaches to correcti
Page 28 and 29:
Introduction into the environment.
Page 30 and 31:
Introduction maquiladoras, to hire
Page 32 and 33:
Introduction (PM 10 and PM 2.5 )—
Page 34 and 35:
Introduction installing scrubbers,
Page 36 and 37:
Introduction The existence of emiss
Page 38 and 39:
Introduction would require an initi
Page 40 and 41:
Introduction EPE generated emission
Page 42 and 43:
OVERVIEW Introduction This volume i
Page 44 and 45:
II A Snapshot of the Border THE MEA
Page 46 and 47:
A Snapshot of the Border states—B
Page 48 and 49:
A Snapshot of the Border Table 1. U
Page 50 and 51:
A Snapshot of the Border Interestin
Page 52 and 53:
Table 3. Percentage Change in Borde
Page 54 and 55:
A Snapshot of the Border Another so
Page 56 and 57:
A Snapshot of the Border plants tha
Page 58 and 59:
A Snapshot of the Border Air Qualit
Page 60 and 61:
A Snapshot of the Border quality. T
Page 62 and 63:
A Snapshot of the Border million in
Page 64:
A Snapshot of the Border THE ENVIRO
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90: Improving Transboundary Air Quality
Page 92 and 93: Appendix A Excerpts from the Border
Page 94 and 95: Environmental Regulation and the Bo
Page 96: Environmental Regulation and the Bo
Page 103 and 104: Nearly 90% think Mexican environmen
Page 114 and 115: Appendix B Survey Instrument Encues
Page 116 and 117: Manquiladora Attitudes 13) ¿Tu com
Page 118 and 119: Manquiladora Attitudes 22)¿Habías
Page 120 and 121: V Designing a Transborder Trading S
Page 122 and 123: Designing a Transborder Trading Sch
Page 148: Designing a Transborder Trading Sch
Page 162 and 163: abatement activities, 4, 6-7, 16, 1
Page 164 and 165: automobile and truck, 47 banking, 2
Page 166 and 167: nitrogen oxide (NO x), 9-10, 16-18,
show all

Entire Book - Southwest Consortium for Environmental Research ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?