Cap-and-Trade Showdown: Will U.S. Voters Pull the Plug?

By Julianne Geiger - Nov 01, 2024

Voters could axe the cap-and-invest program that’s raised over $2 billion since 2023.

Launched under the Climate Commitment Act (CCA), this market requires Washington’s biggest polluters to buy emissions allowances.

Behind the initiative to axe the project is hedge fund manager Brian Heywood, who is doling out cash at rallies while he blames the carbon cap for slapping everyday drivers with higher prices.


Washington state’s carbon market may be a goner. Voters could axe the cap-and-invest program that’s raised over $2 billion since 2023, sending chills through states eyeing similar moves. Launched under the Climate Commitment Act (CCA), this market requires Washington’s biggest polluters to buy emissions allowances.

The controversial program has found itself the subject of a ballot initiative in the upcoming election that some hope will send it packing.

Washington’s CCA, launched in 2023, sets a cap on the state’s carbon emissions, requiring major polluters to buy allowances that match their emissions. Over time, the cap tightens, reducing the number of available allowances to push emissions lower and drive the state toward its ambitious 2050 net-zero goals.

But not everyone’s on board—especially when gasoline prices spiked sky-high—some say as a direct result of the program.

Behind the initiative to axe the project is hedge fund manager Brian Heywood, who is doling out cash at rallies while he blames the carbon cap for slapping everyday drivers with higher prices—with the state earning the designation of highest gas prices in the country last year. In his view, it’s the blue-collar commuters ultimately paying the figurative—and literal—price.

Supporters argue that it fuels green programs—from transit to salmon protection—that a state reliant on fossil fuels badly needs. Even BP, a company typically on the fence about emissions cuts, is campaigning to save it, citing “backward” climate moves if the initiative passes. BP has skin in the game with its Cherry Point refinery but insists it's about the long-term stakes.

Critics might argue that BP has the luxury of supporting a pricey carbon program, leveraging its deep pockets to reap the rewards of a greener image. Smaller polluters, however, lack that cushion and may struggle to absorb the costs without passing them onto consumers.

This is the carbon market experiment that the rest of the country is sizing up for lessons in climate ambition—and reality checks.

By Julianne Geiger for Oilprice.com