17. As compared to a comprehensive carbon price, a renewable portfolio standard does not provide incentives for efficiency in energy use, and its support of only selected technologies is unlikely to produce least-cost outcomes. Similarly, a cap-and-trade system covering only some sectors would minimize costs within but not across sectors. A recent study of twenty CO2 reduction policies (Resources for the Future and National Energy Policy Institute (RFF/NEPI), Toward a New National Energy Policy: Assessing the Options (Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 2010, available at http://www.rff.org/toward-a-new-energy-policy, accessed March 4, 2011) suggests that through 2030, some alternatives to a comprehensive pricing systems (such as a cap-and-trade policy excluding transportation) are reasonably cost-effective.
18. As of February 2011, several bills have been introduced in Congress to delay or block the EPA from moving ahead with implementation of any new rules for regulating CO2 emissions (e.g., see: T. Tracy, “Greenhouse-gas rules targeted by lawmakers” [Wall Street Journal, January 6, 2011]).
19. RFF/NEPI, Toward a New National Energy Policy.
20. See NRC, Advancing the Science, Chapters 4 and 6.
21. Tribal communities are listed as a distinct category because Native American communities that live on established reservations have unique vulnerabilities, given their limited relocation options.
22. See NRC, Adapting to the Impacts for additional details and discussion.
23. See NRC, Adapting to the Impacts for numerous examples of such policies.
24. See NRC, Adapting to the Impacts for additional examples of currently existing maladaptive policies and practices.
25. See NRC, Adapting to the Impacts and references therein.
26. See NRC, Understanding Risk, Public Participation, and Informing Decisions.
27. NRC, Verifying Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
28. See NRC, Public Participation, Informing Decisions, and Informing Effective Decisions.