OnlineCarbonMarket
 
Carbon trading
The carbon marketplace
Carbon market investments
Carbon credits
Carbon valuation tool
More...
Carbon management
Carbon mitigation
Carbon neutral
Carbon footprint
Carbon tax
More...
Air pollution
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Carbon Monoxide
Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)
Perfluorocarbon (PFC)
More...
Greenhouse gas reduction
Soil management
Carbon dioxide sinks
Green-e Climate
Mitigation of global warming
More...
Environmental protection
Defra
Ecosystem Marketplace
Live Earth Pledge
Green energy
More...

California Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM)

The California Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) is an emissions trading program in United States of America. It operates as a cap-and-trade program.

California Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) is an emissions trading program operating in the US state of California. The program started from 1994. It is a cap-and-trade program where pollution causing facilities are required to limit their sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides emissions.

Cap
According to the California Regional Clean Air Incentives Market program, each participating facility is granted a set number of emission rights for free. This is termed as the 'cap'. The number of free emission rights given is decreased every year. It is done so that the facilities are forced to decrease their emissions or purchase emission rights from peer entities having extra rights for trading.

The Regional Clean Air Incentives Market include more than 400 participating entities. This include a number of electric power stations and other varieties of applicable installations.

RTC
Emission rights in RECLAIM are known as RECLAIM Trading Credits (RTC). One RTC equals one tonne of sulfur oxide or nitrogen oxide emissions. The program was created on the assumption that it would achieve environmental results equal to traditional 'command and control' regulations. However, the availability of generous caps resulted in lower rates of compliance.

Emissions of nitrogen oxides were reduced in a slower rate than usual. Initial allocation of caps were 40-60 percent higher than actual emissions at that time. Misleading economic data further contributed to the ineffectiveness of the program.

(c) Stanley Street Labs, 2008