A new study questions conventional methods of calculating carbon emissions liability based on point source pollution by introducing new ‘bottleneck’ theory.

Fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) emit carbon dioxide when burned, which scientists say is the greenhouse gas primarily responsible for global warming and climate change. Climate change causes numerous problems that economists call «externalities,» because they are external to the market. In a new study published in Energies, Alexis Pascaris, graduate student in environmental and energy policy, and Joshua Pearce, the Witte Professor of Engineering, both of Michigan Technological University, explain how current U.S. law does not account for these costs and explore how litigation could be used to address this flaw in the market. The study also investigates which companies would be at most risk.

Pearce explained their past work found that «as climate science moves closer to being able to identify which emitters are responsible for climate costs and disasters, emissions liability is becoming a profound business risk for some companies.»

Most work in carbon emissions liability focuses on who did the wrong and what the costs are. Pascaris and Pearce’s «bottleneck» theory places the focus on who enables emissions.

Focusing Efforts

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency defines point source pollution as «any single identifiable source of pollution from which pollutants are discharged.» For example, pipelines themselves create very little point source pollution, yet an enormous amount of effort has been focused on stopping the Keystone XL Pipeline because of the presumed emissions it enables.

Story Source: Materials provided by Michigan Technological University. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.