Archive: Richard L. Revesz
The EPA can and must proceed with new rules--but it must do so using market-based mechanisms that will not clash with possible future congressional actions. It is bound by law to proceed, but it can move wisely by laying groundwork that will come at the lowest possible costs to business and will mesh well with the legislation Congress will hopefully enact someday soon.
By Richard L. Revesz | June 17, 2010; 11:05 AM ET | Comments (0)
An important addition to any new climate bill is a refund mechanism to protect lower and middle class families from increased energy prices. No matter what road Congress takes to control our greenhouse emissions, energy prices will rise to some extent. The costs businesses incur in their compliance of any new rules will be passed on to consumers.
By Richard L. Revesz | March 5, 2010; 09:30 AM ET | Comments (8)
Since the EPA has no choice but to regulate greenhouse gases, and could come under serious legal fire if it does not, it is a good idea for EPA to act.
By Richard L. Revesz | March 1, 2010; 12:01 PM ET | Comments (0)
While government subsidies for "green technology" may be a piece of the total picture, the only way to efficiently generate the levels of investment needed to wean the economy from carbon-heavy sources of power is a price signal which could be generated as a tax or, more likely, as a cap-and-trade.
By Richard L. Revesz | February 3, 2010; 07:15 PM ET | Comments (2)
The question of how seriously we should worry about the most severe effects of global warming depends on what we are willing to pay to avoid serious harm to our children and grandchildren.
By Richard L. Revesz | January 8, 2010; 12:10 PM ET | Comments (7)
While the slow-down going into Copenhagen isn't good news, it will represent a major set-back only if there is further backsliding. So long as we continue making progress towards emissions limits in the United States while working toward locking in...
By Richard L. Revesz | November 18, 2009; 01:31 PM ET | Comments (1)