text:
The most recent study on climate change by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences concluded that, "Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for—and in many cases is already affecting—a broad range of human and natural systems.1 (See Climate Change 101: Science and Impacts.) The combustion of fossil fuels has contributed to the expansion of the global economy since the start of the Industrial Revolution. It has also substantially increased the concentration of carbon dioxide, the primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. The cumulative impact of these emissions poses significant economic risks. Policies to reduce emissions are required if we are to avoid the most costly damages of a rapidly changing climate. This brief describes how market-based policies can achieve climate goals more cheaply and efficiently than alternative policy structures—all while driving innovation to develop more cost effective, clean energy solutions that will serve as the foundation for strong economic growth throughout the 21st century.
All environmental pollution, including emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), imposes costs on people who did not create the pollution. This is an example of an economic externality – a consequence or side effect of an action that is not experienced by the individual or entity from which it originates, and that is not reflected in prices. The damages and associated costs to society that GHGs cause through climate change (e.g., increased extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and loss of biodiversity) are not paid for by the entities that emit those gases, so those costs are not reflected in the market prices of goods and services. Because polluters do not have to account for the costs associated with the damages that greenhouse gases create, society produces and consumes too many pollution-creating products (like fossil fuels) resulting in additional GHG emissions being put into the atmosphere.
Market-based policies aim to correct this form of market failure (an instance where economic resources are allocated inefficiently). They do this by constructing systems that cause the "external" costs associated with pollution to be incorporated in the polluting entity's decision-making. When firms explicitly see and must pay for the societal cost of pollution, they are able to determine how best to meet an environmental objective. Moreover, when prices of products reflect their full environmental costs, consumers also are better able to make informed purchasing decisions.
Market-based environmental policies are a potentially attractive alternative to traditional command-and-control regulatory programs. Command-and-control policies are widely and typically require polluters to take specific actions to reduce emissions by installing a particular technology or meeting a specific emissions standard. Command-and-control regulations have been criticized as not providing the flexibility to take into consideration that different plants face different compliance options and associated costs – some can do more for less, while others face higher costs. Moreover, traditional regulations do not provide an incentive for firms to innovate, to go beyond the reductions required by the standard.
Market-based options provide greater flexibility for firms and seem particularly appropriate in the context of policies to reduce GHG emissions. For traditional air pollutants, it matters that emissions at any particular point or region do not exceed health-related thresholds. For those types of pollutants, command-and-control regulation is often the appropriate preferred policy response. Because GHGs are not harmful on a localized basis – they are globally mixed in the atmosphere and do damage on a global scale – market-based policies that provide greater compliance flexibility are feasible and can achieve environmental objectives at lower overall costs.
Market-based policies work by creating a structure in which a price associated with pollution emerges. Under this structure, each regulated business chooses independently how to most cost effectively achieve the required pollution abatement. Notably, some companies can reduce pollution more cheaply than others (because of the age of their equipment or the technology they are using), allowing them to reduce their pollution more, to compensate for those facing higher costs doing less. Taken together, the overall environmental objective will be achieved at the lowest possible total costs. The key criterion in determining if a policy is 'market-based' is that it provides a financial incentive designed to elicit a specific behavior from those responsible for the pollution. Some policy options are applicable as economy-wide solutions where greater efficiencies can be achieved, while others are more generally targeted to a particular market segment or sector. (Appendix Aat the end of this brief provides a quick reference for the market-based options described here.)
Each of the policy options described below has the flexibility to be structured in a variety of ways to meet particular political contexts or sets of economic challenges. Further, none of the policies, alone, is a panacea for solving the global climate crisis – for example, complementary policies aimed at research and development and programs to adapt to climate change may also be required. Moreover, different policy approaches may be required depending on the specific market failure that needs to be addressed (e.g., capturing externalities, split incentives between building developer and occupant).To the extent the introduction of these policies proceeds in a piecemeal fashion it is important to remember that market-based policies are more efficient the more businesses and sectors they cover. With more options for reductions it is more likely that some will be less expensive to achieve – thus reducing overall costs for a given level of emissions reduction. For this reason, designing more limited market-based policies (e.g., to a sector or state) so they can later be interconnected with other market-based emission can help reduce the costs of meeting an environmental objective.
The most basic form of a market-based policy is a tax that sets a price on each unit of pollution. By introducing a tax on pollution, the entity that is producing the pollution incurs an additional cost based on the amount of pollution emitted. Because of this, the entity has an incentive to reduce the quantity of pollution produced by changing its processes or adopting new technology. In this way, the tax provides a continuous incentive for innovation; the more emissions can be reduced, the less tax a company would pay. Ideally, the cost of the tax would be set equal to the cost to society that the pollution creates (ascertaining this cost, however, is not always easy – see the box below on Uncertainty). Taxes to reduce GHGs can come in two broad forms: an emissions tax, which taxes firms directly based on the GHG emissions they produce, and a tax on goods or services that are generally GHG-intensive (an example would be a carbon tax on gasoline).
Subsidy programs that provide government assistance (or tax credits) for specific types of low-emitting activities or technology applications function in a similar way to taxes, in that they provide a specific financial mechanism to motivate a particular environmentally beneficial outcome (they are, in fact, negative taxes). Subsidy programs are by their nature a "cost" to taxpayers in general but they are often more popular than new taxes, being seen as a carrot rather than a stick. The current "production tax credit" is an example of a program that uses tax breaks to incentivize the deployment of renewable energy technologies which indirectly reduces GHG emissions.
Assessing the cost to society from pollution is often difficult. While some damages caused by pollution are relatively easy to estimate in monetary terms, others are much more challenging to quantify. For example, if pollution causes a reduction in the fish population for a commercial fishery, we can estimate the damages based on the lost value of the fish at market prices. If, however, wetlands are destroyed or a species becomes extinct, it is not clear how society should assign a specific economic value to that loss. Other complications make it difficult to put a precise dollar figure on the costs imposed by a unit of pollution: they involve questions of how damages that apply to future generations should be valued in today's decisions, and how to quantify consequences when there is a range of possible outcomes or the potential exists for a low-probability, high-impact event.
An alternative market-based mechanism is a cap-and-trade program. This approach is "quantity-based." Instead of setting a price on each unit of pollution, the regulatory authority determines a total quantity of pollution (a "cap") that will be allowed. Companies buy and sell emission allowances (tradable certificates that allow a certain amount of emissions) based on their needs. The limited number of these allowances creates scarcity. The requirement that regulated businesses hold enough allowances to cover their emissions ensures the cap is met and creates demand for the allowances (for more detail on the design of a cap-and-trade program, see Climate Change 101: Cap and Trade). If it is less costly for a company to reduce emissions than to buy allowances, the company will reduce its own emissions. Similarly, if a company can reduce emissions below its requirements, so it has excess allowances, those allowances can then be banked for future use or sold in an open market to a firm that finds it more difficult (costly) to reduce emissions.
Because there is a scarcity of allowances and businesses can trade them, the allowances are valuable and lead to a price on GHGs. This price on GHG emissions provides a continuous incentive to reduce emissions and innovate since firms can save money if they reduce their emissions and avoid buying allowances. In contrast to a tax, some firms may actually be able to raise revenue by selling their excess allowances. This is particularly true if firms are allocated some number of allowances for free (allowances are grandfathered to existing emitters). Since the allowances are valuable, how they are distributed has implications. If they are given away for free, this is a financial benefit to the recipients. If they are auctioned, the resulting revenue can be channeled to specific groups or uses (see the box below on Uses of Revenue). As discussed below, cap and trade has been successfully used to reduce ozone-depleting substances under the Montreal Protocol, acid rain under the Clean Air Act, and GHGs under programs in Europe and in some states in the northeast United States.
A "flexible emissions standard" builds on the rate-based standards typically used for traditional air pollutants. For example, in the power sector, standards could be based on tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity produced. With a flexible emissions standard, firms would be able to meet a technology-based standard either by reducing their own emissions or by trading credits for emission reductions from other firms.
The program to remove lead from gasoline in the 1980's, for example, used a rate-based flexible emission standard to achieve reductions at much lower cost than originally anticipated (see below). Companies that are able to reduce emissions below their targets for less money could generate tradable credits to be sold to firms that have relatively higher control costs. Since firms are participating in a market for tradable reduction credits, the resulting price for those credits sets an equal cost for emission reduction across all of the regulated entities. If the firm has higher reduction costs internally, it can opt instead to buy credits at the lower market price. Instead, if it has lower costs, it has the option to reduce more emissions and profit from selling them at the market price.
Clean or renewable electricity standards are types of electricity porftolio standards typically targeted to spurring commercialization of less polluting clean or renewable energy technologies (often with specific provisions to favor one or more particular technologies) in the electric power sector. These standards can be designed so that each utility within a particular territory must obtain a certain percentage of its delivered electricity from a defined set of clean or renewable sources. Often this is combined with a mechanism that reduces overall compliance costs by allowing a utility that can exceed the standard to create tradable credits that can be banked for future use of sold to other utilities for their compliance. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia already have their own clean or renewable electricity standards in place (see Climate Change 101: State Action). Several legislative proposals have been put forward in Congress over the past few years to create a national standard for clean or renewable energy.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are used for regulating the fuel economy (i.e., miles per gallon of gasoline) of new light-duty vehicles, which include passenger cars and light trucks such as pickups. This standard is calculated using the harmonic mean of the fuel economy of vehicles produced for sale in a year using a set of fuel economy targets that is based upon each vehicle's footprint. The automaker must meet or exceed this standard (including using optional credit transfers) or the firm must pay a fine based on the number of vehicles sold and the magnitude of the difference between the standard and the achieved sales-weighted average. Like a rate-based flexible emissions standard, CAFE standards are designed so that companies that exceed their fuel economy requirements can sell credits associated with that additional fuel economy to firms that do not meet the standard in a given year.
Feebates are a regulatory program creating a schedule of fees and rebates (hence "feebates") to the purchase price of a good based on an aspect of the good that policy hopes to influence. Feebates are most often discussed in the context of changing the relative prices of automobiles based on their fuel economy, but could be applied to a wide range of consumer durables (like refrigerators, washer-dryers, televisions, etc.). Not dissimilar to a gas-guzzler tax, a feebate goes a step further and uses the revenue collected from such a tax to create a subsidy for fuel-efficient purchases. Because it both collects fees as well as distributes rebates (subsidies), the system can be designed to be revenue-neutral to the government (or could be structured to generate revenues or direct expenditures depending on the relative magnitudes of the fees and rebates).
Either a GHG tax or a cap-and-trade system that auctions emission allowances, has the potential to raise revenues for the government. For a tax, the potential revenue raised would be equal to the tax rate times the total quantity of GHG emissions produced in a given year. Under a cap-and-trade program, the revenue generated would depend on the share of allowances offered for sale and the allowance prices at auction.
There are many possible ways that these revenues could be used. A large body of research suggests that one option, using these revenues to reduce existing distortionary taxes on labor and capital investments, would lower the economy-wide costs of the program. Sweden and British Columbia provide two examples of GHG taxes being used specifically to offset taxes on, respectively, labor and individuals/businesses.
However, there may be reasons to use carbon revenue for other purposes. In addition to economic efficiency, policymakers have to concern questions of equity (avoiding burdensome impacts on particular households and businesses). In addition, there are valuable programs that may require funding (e.g., clean energy R&D, adaptation). Several states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (where 100 percent of allowances are auctioned) dedicate much of the revenue to renewable and energy efficiency investments.
In past federal cap-and-trade programs for other pollutants, allowances have generally been allocated for free to regulated businesses. In recent climate proposals, allocation of allowances has gone to a combination of public utilities that would be required to use the allowances for the benefit of their consumers, businesses that could face international competitive impacts, funding for low-carbon technology research and development, and programs to ease the transition to a low carbon economy.
One concern is that allowances or credits that are allocated to regulated businesses under certain circumstances could result in windfall profits. For example, in its first phases, the European Union's cap-and-trade program gave emission allowances to power generators for free, but in competitive electricity markets electricity prices nonetheless increased to reflect the carbon price created by the cap-and-trade program. This led to concern over "windfall profits" for power producers who were viewed as essentially charging customers for emission allowances that they had received for free. Informed by the European experience, U.S. state and regional GHG cap-and-trade programs and federal cap-and-trade proposals generally avoid freely allocating emission allowances to power producers in competitive electricity markets and instead direct the value of those allowances to benefit electricity customers.
Market-based policies to improve the environment are not new; they have been used extensively to protect human health as well as sensitive habitats. These market policies have been used in environmental contexts as diverse as tradable development rights, water effluent, wetland protection and even biodiversity. The U.S. has been a leading proponent of market-based policies globally and both political parties have historically embraced these types of policies in a range of contexts. The examples below highlight some of the market-based policies that have been used in the United States and abroad for reducing different types of air pollution.
EPA started a program for reducing the amount of lead in gasoline in the mid-1970s. Airborne lead, a byproduct of the combustion of leaded gasoline, is known to cause significant health problems. Lead also reduces the function of catalytic converters which were by then required on new vehicles in order to help reduce other forms of air emissions. The initial program required that each refinery individually meet the gasoline lead concentration requirements (though eventually companies were allowed to average across operations company-wide, rather than just refinery-wide).
In the early 1980's, however, it became clear that reducing the content of lead in gasoline even further was required to protect public health. In 1982, under the Reagan Administration, EPA started an enhanced program that operated as a rate-based, flexible emissions standard. It required refiners to meet the lead content requirement based on the quantity of gasoline produced, and allowed firms to trade credits generated by outperforming the standard. If a firm, for example, produced 100 gallons of gasoline, it would be given rights (in 1982) for 110 grams of lead (100 gallons times 1.1 grams per gallon). If the lead content of the gasoline produced by the firm was less, the difference was tradable in the form of credits to another firm that exceeded its rate-based target.
Firms were also allowed to "bank" credits from one compliance period for use in the next. Estimates from EPA suggested that savings to refiners as a result of the banking provision for the program were on the order of $228 million (in 1985 $), and other analysts have suggested that the savings were even higher. EPA estimated that the total cost to refiners to comply with the program would be $2.6 billion, while the benefits to society in the form of reduced health impacts from airborne lead would be $36 billion.2
Under Title VI of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments, EPA established regulations for the reduction of ozone-depleting substances in order to meet the requirements of the 1987 Montreal Protocol to protect the stratospheric ozone layer. The regulations called for a cap-and-trade program in which each of the producers (and importers, as defined by the CAA) were allocated production allowances according to their historical (1986) market shares. Trading of allowances was allowed, and was done on the basis of ozone-depleting potential – that is, the relative amount of harm each chemical inflicts on the ozone layer (in this case, denominated in terms of the ozone-depleting potential of CFC-11).
EPA has estimated that in 1992 the trading provisions enabled cost savings of $250 million "and perhaps twice as much by 1996." Also important were savings in administrative costs – EPA was able to run the program with just four staffers, compared to the 33 that were estimated to be needed under a traditional standards-based, command-and-control regulatory approach. Record keeping for industry would have cost around $300 million under a command-and-control approach but cost only $2.4 million under the trading program.3
The 1990 CAA Amendments (Title IV) also initiated a program aimed at reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions, the major industrial pollutant responsible for the formation of acid rain. This program instituted a cap-and-trade program that is widely credited with reducing emissions at much lower costs than command-and-control. The program was designed to increase the stringency of emissions reductions in two phases. Phase I, started in 1995, targeted large sources in the eastern half of the U.S. (where the acid rain problem was most acute) and was followed by Phase II, in 2000, which covered nearly all power plants.
The acid rain program allocated most emission allowances based on historical fuel use and environmental performance benchmarks to the regulated power companies, but retained a small portion of the allowances for an open auction in which all were free to participate. Allowances were both tradable and bankable – so at any given moment the market for allowances included the current year's emission allowances as well as all unused emission allowances from previous years.
The acid rain program has widely been held up as a model for the success of market-based environmental policy, and for cap and trade in particular. Prior to the start of the program, credible estimates for the costs of compliance for the sulfur dioxide trading program ranged from $2.7 to $8.7 billion dollars annually by the year 2000. As a result of the flexibilities provided by the market mechanisms associated with the policy, the actual annual compliance costs (averaged from 2000-2007) were only $1.9 billion.4.
A regional example of an environmental market-based policy at work is the Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (or RECLAIM) in southern California. The RECLAIM market is designed to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide in the region in a cost-effective manner. The program splits the affected region in southern California into two zones, coastal and inland. The trading program allows trading of emission allowances within each of the zones, but restricts inter-zone trading by disallowing trades from the inland region to the upwind coastal region (in an effort to enhance the protection of the downwind region – trading from the coastal region to the inland region is allowed). The program does not allow banking of current allowances for future years, which has reduced its cost-saving potential but has enhanced the protection to human health by minimizing highly localized pollution concentrations.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is a program originally covering ten New England and Mid-Atlantic states who agreed to cap-and-trade carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.5 The RGGI program sets a cap on power plant emissions to stabilize annual emissions at 188 million tons of CO2 for the years 2009-2014, and then reduces the cap by 2.5 percent per year from 2015-2018 to result in a 10 percent total emissions reduction. Power generators have a variety of options to comply with RGGI; they can reduce their emissions through efficiency measures, switching fuels, using new control technologies, or they can purchase allowances at auction or from other firms. Additionally, generators can use emission "offsets" to meet their emission reduction obligations. Offsets under the RGGI program are defined as emission reductions from sources other than power plants. For example, a permissible source of offsets for the RGGI program could be the capture of methane emissions (a potent GHG) from landfills or agricultural sources. The RGGI program currently allows generators to meet up to 3.3 percent of their emissions obligations through the use of offsets.
The largest market-based policy directly addressing the climate issue to date is the European Union's Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Designed to be consistent with the emission reductions targets included in the Kyoto Protocol, the EU ETS creates a market of tradable emissions allowances for CO2 emissions among the EU member states. The program was, in fact, modeled largely on the successful U.S. acid rain SO2 trading program, and includes many of the same elements.
The program requires that each member state limit and distribute emissions in a manner that is consistent with the nation meeting its international reduction commitment. Once allocated however, the emission allowances are tradable among the participating member states in a common market. Firms can also use emission reduction credits from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)6 for compliance with the program. While some CDM credits have been the subject of controversy, they are widely supported by industry as a tool to control program costs and provide market liquidity. The EU ETS is currently in its second phase (its Kyoto Protocol Compliance period) and Phase III will run from 2013-2020. Banking of excess allowances and credits from phase two into phase three will be allowed.
In general, the fundamental trade-off between price-based (e.g., taxes) approaches and quantity-based (e.g., cap and trade) approaches is either greater compliance cost certainty or greater environmental certainty. A policy that sets an explicit price on a unit of pollution (like a tax) results in a program that offers a high degree of price certainty for the businesses that are regulated. However, while the compliance cost associated with the pollution is more certain, the resulting level of pollution reduction overall is less certain, because each company will respond differently to the price set by the tax. For example, a tax of $1 per gallon of gas could cause Company A to reduce its gasoline consumption by 20 percent but only cause Company B to reduce its consumption by one percent. The level of the reduction is difficult to know in advance and the level of the tax may need to be adjusted over time to achieve a specific emission reduction goal.
In contrast, a quantity-based market policy provides certainty about the environmental outcome because only a limited number of pollution allowances are distributed or auctioned. In this case, while the environmental outcome is certain, the cost to firms for emitting pollution is uncertain (particularly at the outset of the program) and will be determined by the market price for allowances. Real-world market-based policy proposals, however, are not so "black and white" and can be designed with policy components that create more certainty for both price and quantity. For example, recent cap-and-trade policy proposals have included price floors and price ceilings in order to give more compliance cost certainty (for more details see Climate Change 101: Cap and Trade).
A typical concern about implementing any new environmental policy relates to the short-term market disruptions that often accompany an adjustment to a new regulatory environment. These concerns tend to be amplified during periods when the economic environment is already distressed (as is the case at the time of this publication). An inherent advantage of emission trading systems in this respect is its self-adjusting nature in response to economic conditions. Reduced economic growth tends to lower the use of fossil fuels, which lowers the demand for allowances and thus under a cap-and-trade system the market price of allowances would be reduced. This has certainly been the recent history in both the RGGI and EU ETS where demand for allowances and market prices have decreased with reduced economic growth. In times of economic expansion, the opposite is true – under cap-and-trade, allowance prices rise when economic growth is strong. In this sense, cap-and-trade can be seen as providing a self-adjusting price, higher when the economy is doing well and lower when the economy is in a downturn.
Often the debate surrounding whether policy should be pursued to mitigate climate change focuses on the costs associated with such actions. It is certainly true that regulations designed to curtail emissions of greenhouse gases will entail costs. But it is also true that failure to regulate GHGs will also result in costs – the costs of climate damage from inaction. (See Climate Change 101: Science and Impacts and Climate Change 101: Adaptation). Market-based climate policies are designed to minimize compliance costs while also avoiding the worst consequences that a dramatically changing climate could create.
There is no single policy that can achieve a comprehensive solution to mitigating climate change – a variety of policies will undoubtedly be required to address the challenges specific to different sectors of the economy. Market-based policies provide the most economically efficient path for doing so. The more flexibility that regulated businesses have, the more opportunities they will find to innovate and to reduce the costs associated with protecting the environment. A significant advantage of market mechanisms, whether they be price-based (e.g., tax) or quantity-based (e.g., cap and trade), is that they provide a continuous incentive to reduce emissions – the more a company can reduce, the larger its financial gain. Under traditional command-and-control regulation, there is no incentive to go beyond the regulatory standard. In a market-based policy, the financial incentive drives the private sector to continuously innovate and seek new emission-reducing technologies that regulators might not anticipate under command-and-control. In a market system, such emission-reducing innovation can set the stage for deeper emission cuts over time. This is particularly important because addressing such a challenging environmental problem as climate change will require new technology to achieve the substantial emission cuts that are necessary over the coming decades.
|Compliance Cost Certainty
|Environmental Certainty
|Revenue Recycling
|Technology Mandate - Command-and-Control
|Limited - incentive exists to achieve mandated technology at lower costs
|No revenue raised by policy
|Performance Standard (rate based, non-tradeable)
|Limited - once the standard can be met, there is little incentive to continue to improve performance beyond reducing costs
|No - difficult for policymakers to understand cost structures that will lead to compliance
|Some - a performance standard will require that each unit have a certain emissions profile but total emissions will depend on overall use characteristics
|Difficult to link beyond a specific sector
|Some - policymakers can create standards specific for each sector to expand their reach
|Performance Standard (rate-based, tradeable
|Yes - firms have incentive to innovate to reduce emissions and avoid buying allowances (or to have more excess allowances to sell)
|No - difficult for policymakers to foresee trading prices based on sector-wide marginal compliance costs
|Some - a rate-based standard determines the emission-intensity of output; but total emissions will vary with output
|Yes - resulting "carbon price" could theoretically be linked to other trading programs
|No - difficult to expand beyond initial sector
|Renewable or Clean Energy Portfolio Standard (potentially tradable
|Limited - once standard is met there is no ongoing incentive to invest in renewables. Does not incentivize efficiency innovations
|Minimal - can be difficult to know costs of meeting a renewable quota
|Some - an RPS/CES behaves similarly to a performance standard. Total emissions will vary with overall output since an RPS/CES typically requires some fraction of power to be renewable
|Yes - programs can be designed to trade production quotas, or buy renewable power, from other regions
|Minimal - an RPS could link with a renewable fuels standard, but these renewable fuel mandates are probably limited to electricity generation and transportation fuels
|Yes - firms have incentive to innovate to reduce emissions and avoid buying allowances (or to have more excess allowances to sell)
|No - difficult for policymakers to foresee the price of allowances in a tradable open market (can be mitigated with price bands)
|Yes - a "cap" on emissions means that the total level of emissions is known (certainty reduced with price bands)
|Yes - new regions can be included or merged into a trading program (may be complicated by price bands)
|Yes - can be expanded to other sectors or regions
|Depends on if allowances are allocated for free or if they are auctioned to raise public revenues
|Cabon Tax (on emissions or product)
|Yes - firms have incentive to innovate to reduce emissions and tax payments. May lead to substitution toward other goods and could lead to process efficiencies or new techniques with low carbon products
|Yes - the marginal cost of a unit of pollution is defined by the tax rate
|No - with a fixed tax rate, actual emissions will vary depending on the cost of reducing emissions as determined by such factors as economic growth, technological progress, and changes in energy supply
|Potentially harmonized with the tax rates of other governments, but may be politically contentious. Cannot be linked to trading programs to reduce compliance costs
|Potentially can be expanded to include additional sectors or regions as needed.
|Production Tax Credit
|Limited - induces innovation for production of favored technologies. Does not incentivize new technologies or processes, does not price carbon
|Yes - provides financial incentive to producers. Costs to businesses taking advantage of the credit are negative
|No - actual deployment of technologies will depend on other market conditions in addition to the magnitude of the tax credit
|No - reduces tax receipts
|Feebates (revenue neutral)
|Yes - efficiency is priced into the good so consumer-demand will continuously shift for more efficient products
|Yes - there is no compliance cost to manufacturers, only changing consumer demand patterns based on altered final retail prices
|No - many other market factors will influence ultimate uptake of efficient goods
|Depends on "zero-point" of feebate. Typically designed to be revenue-neutral
Allocation– Under an emissions trading scheme, one approach is for emission allowances to be given away for free. Sometimes referred to as 'grandfathering' allowances allocated in this manner can be based on past emissions or output in a base year, or on emission performance benchmarks, or on an 'updating' approach based on more recent emissions or output. The alternative is to auction permits in an initial market offering. Policymakers have discretion when allocating emission allowances and this can be a useful political tool to ease the transition to an emissions trading program, or to compensate affected parties.
Banking– The carry-over of allowances from one emissions trading period to the next, i.e., saving emissions allowances for use at a later date. In order for an entity to "bank" allowances, they must have an excess of allowances from an earlier period as the result of over-compliance with an emission reduction standard.
Borrowing– The conceptual opposite of "banking"; using an emissions allowance prior to the date of its issue. Often regulators design borrowing programs to include the assessment of a fee or penalty to discourage over-use of this type of provision. Borrowing leads to under-compliance in the early period and over-compliance in the later period.
Carbon Tax – A surcharge placed on the carbon content of oil, coal, and gas that discourages the use of fossil fuels and aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
Cost-Effective (Cost-Effectiveness) – minimizing the costs of achieving some given objective. A 'cost-effective' environmental policy achieves its environmental goals at the lowest possible overall costs. Improving a policy's 'cost-effectiveness' moves in that direction – it achieves an environmental objective at a lower average unit cost.
Discounting – The process that reduces future costs and benefits to a present value reflect the time value of money and preference for consumption now rather than later. A 'discount rate' makes an explicit assumption about the relative value of a good or service in the future compared to the present.
Emissions Cap – A mandated restraint in a scheduled timeframe that puts a "ceiling" on the total amount of emissions that can be released into the atmosphere, and a key component in a 'cap-and-trade' program. This can be measured as gross emissions or as net emissions (emissions minus gases that are sequestered).
Emissions Tax – A tax applied to the quantity of emissions produced.
Emissions Trading – A market mechanism that allows emitters (countries, companies or facilities) to buy emissions from or sell emissions to other emitters. Emissions trading is expected to bring down the costs of meeting emission targets by allowing those who can achieve reductions less expensively to sell excess reductions (e.g. reductions in excess of those required under some regulation) to those for whom achieving reductions is more costly.
Externality – A consequence or side effect of an economic activity that impacts individuals not directly related to the activity, and that is not reflected in prices. Environmental pollution is an example of a negative externality because pollution imposes a cost on people who are not necessarily a party to the activity that produces the pollution. It is a form of market failure.
Linkability – The ability of a policy mechanism to be coordinated with other similar policies. An emissions trading program (like cap and trade) has linkability because such a program can be designed so that its participants can trade emissions allowances with participants in other programs, essentially creating a common market.
Market Failure – When a market does not allocate resources efficiently. A negative externality caused by pollution is an example.
Offsets – A voluntary emission reduction project done outside of a mandatory requirement where the resulting emission reductions can be quantified and ownership transferred. Some trading programs allow the resulting ownership credit of the offset to displace a similar level of emission reduction within a trading program.
Price Ceiling (Safety Valve) – A price ceiling is a policy option for an emissions trading program in which the regulatory authority makes a standing offer to sell additional allowances into the system at a specified price. That price serves as the upper bound that the market price for tradable emissions allowances will reach. This is used to ensure that compliance costs do not exceed policy-makers' design assumptions.
Price Floor – The conceptual opposite of the 'price ceiling'. In an emissions trading program the price floor is a price at which the regulatory authority is willing to buy (or withhold from auction – also called a 'reserve price') allowances from the system. The price floor serves to place a lower bound that the market price for tradable emissions allowance will reach. Price floors are used to guarantee the value of emissions allowances, which is important for encouraging investment in emission-reducing technology.
Revenue Recycling – The re-use of the government revenues generated as a result of a market-based policy (either from tax receipts or from the proceeds of an allowance auction).
Subsidy – A government payment to encourage a particular economic action; the opposite of a tax.
1 National Academy of Sciences, Advancing the Science of Climate Change (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2010).
2 Robert Hahn, "Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: How the Patient Followed the Doctor's Orders," The Journal of Economic Perspectives 3 (1989, no. 2:95-114.
3 "Savings from Using Economic Incentives for Environmental Pollution Control," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, last modified March 19, 2012, http://yosemite1.epa.gov/EE/epa/eed.nsf/webpages/SavingsFromEconomicIncentivesTOC.html.
4 Larry Parker, and Brent D. Yacobucci, Climate change costs and benefits of the cap-and-trade provisions of H.R. 2454, R40809 (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 2009).
5 Since the initial agreement, one state has dropped out of the cap-and-trade program. On May 26, 2011 New Jersey Governor Chris Christie announced that his state would be leaving RGGI's cap-and-trade program. The New Jersey legislature passed a bill in August 2011 that would have kept the state in the program, but it was overridden by Governor Christie's veto.
6 The Clean Development Mechanism was created under Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol. The mechanism allows for the approval of emission-reduction (or emission removal) projects in developing countries that can earn certified emission reduction (CER) credits. These saleable credits can be used by industrialized countries to meet a part of their emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol


text:
T3 Girls: Eva
Another day, another gorgeous gadget-loving stunner graces the pages of T3. We pick only the sexiest tech lovelies to help show off all the amazing new gadgets in T3 magazine and each month we'll take those top-draw snaps and share them online along with our sensational cover model videos.
Over the years we've had a host a beauties grace the cover of T3 magazine, brandishing the hottest new kit of the moment. The lovely Eva, is the latest lady to adorn our illustrious cover.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Palm oil is used by Cameroon people as a basis for their food consumption. They process their own crude oil from palm trees, Cameroon is a big importer of palm oil. According to specialists, the gap between production and consumption is due to a low production rate, low prices in the local market and competition with imported oil.
© Jan-Joseph Stok / Greenpeace
1 - 12 of 1380 results.
Multimedia hub
Want to learn more about tax-deductible giving, donating stock and estate planning? Visit Greenpeace Fund, a nonprofit, 501(c)(3) charitable entity created to increase public awareness and understanding of environmental issues through research, the media and educational programs.


text:
Make an artistic fashion statement with this bold design, as part of our exclusive One-Of-A-Kind collection. One tumbled rough ruby, at 28.42 carats, is surrounded in quality 14 karat white gold. One emerald cut lavender sapphire, at .43 carat, and ten round diamonds, at .30 carat, add sparkle and compliment the unique stone. This pendant hangs from a matching 18-inch rolo chain with a two inch chain extender. The total gem weight is 29.15 carats.
Order now for delivery on or before
Tuesday, April 07, 2015
using FedEx Priority Overnight.


text: Using Transfer Artist Paper (articles 20139 and 20140), you can transfer any image onto fabric, paper, wood, glass, metal, clay and more! Learn how to use TAP for quiltmaking, fiber arts, mixed-media and papercrafts. 15 unique projects to help you unlock your own inner artist, so you can create your own masterpieces. 64 pages.


text:
Награды и обзоры
|Награды и обзоры
|"There are many good password managers out there.but Siber Systems free RoboForm app goes one step further. This secure password manager is also a smart form filler that can save you time while browsing the Web."
|"Ed Bott of ZDNet says RoboForm is one of "My seven favorite Windows 7 utilities.""
|"Like me, you probably have more usernames and passwords than you can remember. Let RoboForm recall them for you."
|"Wayne Cunningham of CNET Download.com declares in his newsletter: "One of the basic tools that offers undisclosed power... I highly recommend it.""
|"I tried quite a few [password managers] and settled on RoboForm... I feel so much safer that I'm thinking of replacing the locks on my doors too."
|"RoboForm is a great tool for storing usernames, passwords and other data"
|"Lee Gomes of Wall Street Journal says: "Easy to use and without any hidden spyware... Innovative, lean, useful product.""
|"Alan Krauss of New York Times says: "It Knows All Your Passwords (But Promises Not to Tell).""
|"Paul Taylor of Financial Times declares: "My favourite password manager... Easy to use, does not pop up ads in my face or grab information from me. Most importantly, it simply works well.""
|"Steve Wright of BBC Radio name RoboForm "Free Software Download of the Year.""
|"M-Systems (now part of SanDisk) declared RoboForm2Go (Pass2Go) to be the winner of M-systems' Essential U3 Application Award in 2006."
|"Shareware Industry Association (SIA) gives Peoples Choice 2004 award to RoboForm in the "Best Web Enhancement" category."
|"SoftPedia awarded 5 stars (Pick) award to RoboForm and RoboForm2Go."
|"Mike Himowitz of the Baltimore Sun writes: "RoboForm... is the Rolls-Royce of this [password manager] category.""
|"James Coates of Chicago Tribune writes: "Call it a matter of principle and point your browser to www.roboform.com for highly acclaimed password manager and web form-outer...""
|"GearDownload awarded 5 stars to RoboForm2Go."
|"Computer Shopper magazine says: "The most powerful password-management software we've come across.""
|"Peggy Rogers of Miami Herald likes RoboForm: "Program shrinks massive list of passwords to one.""
|"Philadelphia Inquirer recommends RoboForm as one of "The best utilities that can help you work better.""
|"Fred Langa suggests in Information Week: Forget Passport and Magic Carpet, use RoboForm Password Manager."
|"Dan Mitchell of TechTV exhales: "Add RoboForm to your list of must-have downloads.""
|"IJ Hudson of NBC TV of Washington, DC says in its feature on RoboForm: "RoboForm uses AI to figure out which boxes get which information. No worries about mistyping.""
|"ABC News' Larry Jacobs interviews Bill Carey, our VP of Marketing about using our RoboForm Password Manager in his nationally broadcasted "Cybershake" brief."
|"Tucows, a major shareware and freeware site, gives Five Cows to RoboForm and makes it Head Of The Herd."
|"Major Geeks gives Editors' Pick and 5 Stars to RoboForm."
|"LockerGnome endorses RoboForm: "It makes filling out fields for credit cards, banking, and online shopping a snap.""
|"About.com comes to this conclusion: Looks like a real Winner!"
|"Internet Magazine UK lists RoboForm among Hot Downloads."
|".NET, a popular UK magazine, recommends RoboForm."
|"PcWelt, a German computer magazine reviews RoboForm."
|"TechChannel, a German web site, lists RoboForm in the list of recommended plugins."


text:
|Regions:Dover/Somersworth -Great Bay - Rochester - Southern Maine
|Exeter Greenland Portsmouth New Castle Newington Stratham Rye
Go Mobile: http://mobile.fosters.com
Late Redhook worker's estate ruling issued but not released
Friday, February 8, 2013
PORTSMOUTH — A ruling has been issued in a family court case in Portsmouth that will determine whether a deceased Redhook Brewery worker's legal spouse and her child are entitled to benefits from his estate.
A judge presiding over the paternity case issued a ruling Wednesday, according to a clerk at the Portsmouth court. However, it was not being made available for public view as of Thursday afternoon. The order is unlikely to be released before next week, the clerk said.
Kettering challenged Alysha Harris about her relationship and time living with her brother. Although Benjamin Harris was initially excited at the prospect that Alysha Harris was bearing his child, he began expressing "a lot of doubts," according to a court motion filed by Kettering's attorney.
It's unclear whether Kettering's challenge against the paternity request was sustained during this week's court hearing.


text:
Click here for the flyer.
We are pleased to announce the 2014 Compliance Training Workshops and Webinar series. Hosted by the Credit Union League of CT and facilitated by the experts at M&M Consulting, LLC, these training workshops and webinars will provide comprehensive understanding of upcoming regulatory changes and assist in providing exciting solutions to the regulatory difficulties Connecticut credit unions are faced with.
This year, in an effort to maximize the benefits of this invaluable guidance, the league will provide the opportunity to attend the webinar portion of the series from the convenience of your credit union. As always, the league is happy to provide the webinars at our office in Meriden at no cost to our affiliated credit unions. If however, you are interested in attending from your credit union, the registration fee is $89.00 per webinar/per incoming telephone line. You may have as many employees who wish to take advantage of any particular webinar attend from your credit union provided they are on the same telephone line for this small cost. Registration to attend either option is required.
M&M Consulting, LLC experts will also serve as facilitators in the Workshop portion of this series. These experts are secure in their knowledge, and confident of their ability to convey pertinent compliance information. Affiliated credit unions will leave our Workshop training sessions with an understanding of how to meet the challenges they face in today's regulatory environment. The workshops are available to our affiliated credit unions at no additional cost. Dates will be announced and registration is required.
The first webinar in the series focuses on the confusion around the new mortgage regulations. It is scheduled for Wednesday, March 5th 9:00 am – 11:00 am and will provide comprehensive understanding on how these rules affect the mortgage products and services you provide your members, as well as how to comply with the regulations. This is a great opportunity to obtain additional guidance now that the rules have taken effect and the need for implementation grows with more intensity.
See registration flyer below,
See flyer below for more details-
Click here for the flyer!
Click here for the Chapter Notice!
Click here to download or print the flyer!
Click here for the Full Registration Form.
Click here to download the flyer!
Has the Wave Of Compliance Hit Your Credit Union? We have a solution for you!!!
The Credit Union League of CT together with CUSolutions/InfoSight is pleased to announce ComplySight!
ComplySight serves as the universal compliance web-based management and tracking tool that streamlines the compliance process throughout your credit union.
ComplySight provides visibility, tracking, measuring and reporting for compliance activities allowing your credit union to address compliance initiatives through a single application, assisting in your organization's overall communication, supporting a state of continual readiness for audits, and providing regulatory updates essential to maintaining your credit union's compliance.
View this short informative ComplySight video presentation:
Click here for an informational flyer.
Join the ComplySight Product Team for one of the following comprehensive training sessions: click to register for one of the following ComplySight Webinars
Upcoming Webinars for September 2014
Introduction to ComplySight
September 2nd 3:30 – 4:00 pm (EST)
September 9th 3:30 – 4:00 pm (EST)
September 16th 3:30 – 4:00 pm (EST)
September 23rd 3:30 – 4:00 pm (EST)
September 30th 3:30 – 4:00 pm (EST)
ComplySight Training 1.01
September 8th 3:30 – 4:30 pm (EST)
September 22nd 3:30 – 4:30 pm (EST)
ComplySight Training & Tips
September 3rd 3:30 – 4:30 pm (EST)
September 24th 3:30 – 4:30 pm (EST)
Related Links
For more information contact Judy Britt via email at firstname.lastname@example.com or by telephone at 203-608-7056.
ComplySight is brought to credit unions through the cooperative efforts of The Credit Union League of CT, other Leagues from across the country and CUNA.


text:
Hearn Elementary School
1120 Leestown Rd
Frankfort, KY 40601
Map It!
Years Labeled (Rating):
2009 (90)
Facility Type:
K-12 School
Total Floor Space:
Year Constructed:
Building Owner:
Franklin Co. Board of Education
Property Manager:
Franklin Co. Schools
For More Info:
Whitley Casey
Lexington, KY 40503
Please note: The building information in this profile was verified and submitted to EPA at the time of application. Building energy performance, operating
characteristics, and ownership/management may be subject to change over time.


text:
From 10 Sat Aug 2013 every Saturday
8:00AM-1:00PM (Oct-May) 7:00AM-11:00AM (June-Sept)
Features: Local farm produce including fresh vegetables & fruit, baked goods, honey, jams and jellies, nursery stock, natural pork, beef and fish, hand crafted items. Roadrunner Park includes a large children's playground with play equipment, a fishing pond, ducks and geese on premises, a Junior Motocross track, swimming pool, soccer fields, and all kinds of special events such as dog shows. Canine "Good Citizines" always welcome! Free admission, free parking. Accepts AZ Farmers Market Nutrition Program vouchers. Also available at this market: Easy credit card shopping! One credit card charge can pay for all your purchases from the vendors! Find out more at the information booth!
Roadrunner Park. 3502 East Cactus Road, Phoenix (between Freeway 51 & 36th St) or for more information click here


text:
Why do tai chi practitioners experience longevity, inner peace, and inner power? With Tai Chi Easy™, developed by master teacher Roger Jahnke, it's easy to discover why.
Spanish Language Immersion for Beginners provides you with the knowledge and skills you need to easily and effectively communicate in Spanish as if you were in a Spanish-speaking country, and you don't even need a passport!
Has your body stopped moving as freely as it once did? Would you like to experience more natural, efficient, and pain-free movement?
Taoist master Mantak Chia says the foundation of healing love is the cultivation, transformation, and circulation of sexual energy, and that this creative, generative energy is vital for the development of life-force, which enables higher practice
This workshop for beginning and advanced songwriters focuses on songwriting as a tool for self-discovery.
This photography workshop is not about making "pretty" pictures or postcard-like records of our travels.
Free yourself from pain and stiffness in the warm and supporting environment of water. When you practice yoga in warm water, you can reduce swelling in injured or swollen joints and avoid soreness.
Master teacher Glenn Black guides us in an exploration of the deeper non-physical levels of our being through the transformative practices of kriya yoga and yoga nidra meditation.
In this Advanced Songwriting workshop with Grammy-nominee Jimmie Dale Gilmore, we further explore songwriting as a tool for self-discovery, building on insights and techniques drawn from the Songwriting workshop.
Inspired by the ancient Tibetan spiritual practice of Chöd, Feeding Your Demons is a five-step process created by Lama Tsultrim Allione to befriend and transform negative emotions, fears, physical and mental illness, addictions, and self-defeating


text:
- Like
- Thanks for voting!
- Download
- Collection
.. December 21, 2011
so anyone else find it weird that we can fap to the porno and then read all the comments from other guys who fapped to the porno before you and then comment on the video after said fapping? its like a bathroom stall in a remote gas station just slightly classier
Lrx February 14, 2011
God damn... wich one is cuter?
kanackHOTTEST January 23, 2011
King Cum January 10, 2011
This clip has everything. I love it!!!
Al December 14, 2010
Good for you sloppymess
oh my god December 17, 2010
does anyone know about other vids of this perfect brunette???
best vid February 20, 2011
the Best Vid Evere
strange March 2, 2011
it's kinda weird (and gay) knowing that thousands of other guys around the world are jerking their shit watching this video like one big fucking circle jerk. that's internet porn for you i suppose. still a hot video though
BBBBBB May 22, 2011
the brunette on is sooooooooo sexyyyyyyy
Clint May 25, 2011
The brunette is absolutely fucking gorgeous
OMG May 3, 2011
i love the cute blonde girl :D
jerome April 29, 2011
hhh March 5, 2011
sloppymess December 10, 2010
We would like to reassure everyone that the poster above has been led away and shot. I think we all agree it was in everyones best interest.
Ruined it for everyone el December 8, 2010
Ha! There were 69 comments! Now there's 70...
giggidy July 22, 2010
a sneaky wank before bed was well worth it from this vid
jdub August 8, 2010
that brunette is practically perfect...A-M-A-Z-I-N-G set of tits, and a nice round ass with small waist, to boot. id stab my best friend in the neck for a piece of that.
Firedevil July 20, 2010
was für 2 geile fickstücke
Peacock July 20, 2010
I wish I were the man in this video... Both girls are Gorgeous. Awesome!
Tugaralho July 19, 2010
Nice, amatourish, but nice, still, the ending became a bit scummy.....
eric1804 August 17, 2010
geiler fick
Anonymous August 23, 2010
Fucking hell, they are both shit hot.
pussy November 16, 2010
i just came up my gf's pussy after we have been watching hot porn for hours. then we made love . hot intense passion. when i came it felt incredible, this porn helps !
penisaurus rex November 24, 2010
the blond is an angel !!!
JohnTravolta October 27, 2010
The blonde is HOT!!! If i were him, i would fuck the blonde first xD
new cummer October 21, 2010
she's so fucking hot with those socks. i gotta buy my gf a pair. i'm gonna cum inside her pussy and then cum inside her socks while she wears them. so much sperm so little time :D
JohnnyBGood September 19, 2010
The Brunette is so gorgeous leaving her socks on while getting fucked! The guy should be awarded a medal of honour for lasting even that long... with these two bunnies I would have cum in 15 seconds!
bi_lagirl June 5, 2011
I want that ass in my mouth!!!
Con-naisseur August 18, 2011
Brunettes for me are always hotter - yes my mother was one once!
Mad November 16, 2012
Graf Porn December 28, 2012
they are Kasey Chase and Jennifer White ...
HEYWOOD JABLOWME November 15, 2012
XXX October 14, 2012
This is awesum
shooter October 9, 2012
i`m ready to fuck anyone want big shot
ugo February 22, 2013
a loro piace più lo sperma che leccano e succhiano o il tocco delicato delle lorol ingue
derly March 9, 2013
Lolz July 17, 2014
"you should just kiss each other, like natural lube" #pornlogic
YG 400 August 3, 2014
Need this in real live
damn May 30, 2014
Claire May 5, 2014
I love pussy and cock so sharing a guy is my favourite type of sex
SexaddictedBOZ October 30, 2013
She z allready been fckt in the ass it isnt her first time
jjj August 15, 2012
really nice
Yeah July 22, 2012
The guy looks like Sein from The Walking Dead.
Marii September 5, 2011
Best threesome ever.
i October 22, 2011
love it
genius August 31, 2011
they are here too!!!! " Sweet slut with rainbow socks gets fuck"
c manning August 26, 2011
u da man. thants my man!
wwow July 17, 2010
Never left a comment before, but THIS is perfect!! I want more of you!!! :D
The Dick December 8, 2011
I'm not sure, but I think this is the blonde chick (but with darker hair). She's better looking than the brunette. http://www.youporn.com/watch/556810/put-your-fat-cock-in-my-mouth/?from=vbwn Enjoy ;)
Mg December 11, 2011
Increible!! Que envidia me da este tipo, por favor! En toda mi vida solo hice el amor con mi novia-esposa y realmente cuando veo esto mis convicciones se tambalean.
Ardbegman June 5, 2012
Mmmm nice hot video ! I love cumswaps !
girl A July 7, 2012
in the beginning the girl enjoys the sex because the blonde licks her pussy at the same time. i don't like it when guys only fuck to satisfy themselves. they need to pay more attention to their girl, cause thrusting isn't in itself that exciting. it's getting there and getting wet that makes things better...
misspop69 February 28, 2012
my fave position, underneath in a 69 with my gf while shes getting a big hard fat cock in her pussy and im licking her clit and his cock balls and asshole, damn i wsant some cock ;p xx
Pino February 21, 2012
They are both perfect! Wish to see more from them e.e
theonlygirl January 16, 2012
i love watching his dick ram her pussy. fucking turns me on. personally i would love to eat the blondes pussy while getting fucked if i were the brunette.
Hell yeah August 11, 2011
she does look like her
Mr.E July 17, 2010
@Late Knight A-fucking-greed
Fuckstick July 16, 2010
Makes me wish my girlfriend is bi.
cool not fag July 16, 2010
wow porn is so whack i dont know why im watchin this
TheProbe July 16, 2010
The brunette is totally hot and has pefect tits! Is there any other stuff with her? Hot video.
nator July 16, 2010
@kriminal kid I'm sure your girl would be happy to hear about your comparison of her ass with this girl's ass. lol
... July 16, 2010
the blond is absolutly perfect o.o
tool July 16, 2010
yum yum yum yum
ts July 16, 2010
girls dont LIKE to spit the sperm in each other's mouths. totally just porn and no reallife-fun. does turn me up.
weed July 16, 2010
Lucky cunt...
cam July 16, 2010
holy fucking shit. hottest shit ive ever seen!
oda89 July 16, 2010
italianiiiiiiiiiii figli delle seghe su youporn fatevi sentireeeeeeeeeeee:D
GonzoBoy July 16, 2010
Brunette - 10 out of 10 Blonde - 9 out of 9 Guy - Should have lasted longer
fucking July 16, 2010
i like it this video
cocklover July 16, 2010
gestoßen un dazu geleckt werden, da geht es richtig ab!
me July 16, 2010
best vid ive seen on this site for a long time! I wanna be that guy, the girls look so desperate!
Kriminal Kid July 16, 2010
I LOVE how her ass jiggles so smoothly when he taps!! just like my girl
Mr.E July 16, 2010
Holy fucking shit! That was amazing!
LP July 16, 2010
was für 2 geile Fickmäuse
Anon July 16, 2010
The girl on top is so freaking hot.
dr July 16, 2010
niccce fk!!!
trololol July 16, 2010
agreed. her tits are just perfect, and she reminds me olivia wilde, lol
Yeah July 16, 2010
OMFG This was the best video ever
abc July 16, 2010
what is the brunette girl's name?
late knight July 16, 2010
me 20 minutes ago: should i go to bed or jack off .....one of my best decision ever, that was fucking amazing
Johnnybi July 16, 2010
The blonde seems a bit more interested in the other girl.
Smacktard July 16, 2010
Dont you think the blonde is hotter? I woulda fucked her brains out. You can still look at the brunettes tits during lol.
triggered July 16, 2010
The blond is one greedy little cocksucker! Her friend, one hell of a hot body!
Slevin July 16, 2010
Porn fills me with regret yet drains me of my manly fluids.
July 16, 2010
Holy shit that was great just 3 minutes but :P Hot Hot Hot
ssw July 16, 2010
Brunette is Jennifer White. Blonde is Kasey Chase. The whole video is uploaded on xvideos
carmelo July 16, 2010
fichissimo bello il numero
on top girls July 16, 2010
dat ass
kik July 16, 2010
Sophie and Vanessa the REALLY names
para July 16, 2010
Really good, but would have preferred a longer video
ich July 16, 2010
G July 16, 2010
Fucking hot!!
Oscar July 17, 2010
Is this real? Even if staged, very hot.
TheJizz July 17, 2010
WoW...They didnt waste notta one drop...lmmfao
Lloyd Christmas July 17, 2010
Hot hot.
bobo July 16, 2010
watch the whole thing on xvid - best threesome i've ever seen - no wonder he can't last...
jotatan779 July 16, 2010
buena toma...jessica, quisiera saber quien es jessica
ichbinsnur July 16, 2010
That was just dreams cumming true...
kik July 16, 2010
Jessica & Sarah the names
F!F! July 16, 2010
why I can not see the video? Yet I see them before
Loading Comments


text:
Ask Legal Question
Legal Answers
Search Past Legal Answers
Find an Attorney
Browse Legal Articles
Customer Support
About Us
Attorney Network
Questions Answered by
Jason Marker
Jason Marker has answered
59 free legal questions
since 05/03/2004
Back to Profile
Personal Injury Law and Tort Law
8 answers
Workers' Compensation Law
51 answers
Get Free Legal Advice
active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Are you an Attorney?
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
Join LawGuru Now
Find a Legal Form
Browse and download our attorney-prepared and up-to-date legal forms from
Find a Form


text:
Nomination Form | Policy
Recipients - Alphabetical
Recipients - Chronological
Honorary Degrees Recipients-Chronological
Printable listing
Reverend Bishop Clarkson, Doctor of Laws
William H. Snell, Master of Philosophy
A. J. Poppleton, Doctor of Laws
C. D. Wilber, Doctor of Laws
George H. Collier, Doctor of Laws
James Monroe, Doctor of Laws
Champion S. Chase, Doctor of Laws
E. B. Andrews, Doctor of Laws
C. N. Little, Master of Arts
David R. Dungan, Doctor of Laws
J. M. Woolworth, Doctor of the Humanities
J. T. Duryea, Doctor of Laws
George A. Gates, Doctor of Laws
C. H. Gere, Master of Arts
William R. Harper, Doctor of Laws
G. E. Howard, Doctor of Philosophy
W. F. Slocum, Jr., Doctor of Laws
C. O. Whitman, Doctor of Laws
L. Burner, Bachelor of Science
O. V. P. Stout, Civil Engineer
A. H. Edgren, Doctor of Laws
I. J. Manatt, Doctor of Laws
John M. Thayer, Doctor of Laws
Edgar S. Dudley, Doctor of Laws
James Carroll, Doctor of Laws
Andrew Rosewater, Doctor of Engineering
J. B. Crabtree, Master of Arts
John P. Hartman, Master of Laws
J. L. McBrien, Master of Arts
A. H. Waterhouse, Master of Arts
W. M. Davidson, Doctor of Laws
B. J. Arnold, Doctor of Engineering
M. E. Cooley, Doctor of Engineering
J. A. L. Waddell, Doctor of Engineering
G. P. Costigan, Doctor of Laws
Roscoe Pound, Doctor of Laws
M. B. Reese, Doctor of Laws
H. J. Webber, Doctor of Agriculture
A. F. Woods, Doctor of Agriculture
L. S. Parker, Doctor of Fine Arts
W. G. L. Taylor, Doctor of Laws
Edith Abbott, Doctor of Letters
Clark F. Ansley, Doctor of Letters
Willa S. Cather, Doctor of Letters
R. A. Emerson, Doctor of Laws
R. F. Gilder, Doctor of Science
S. Mills Hayes, Doctor of Humanities
John G. Neihardt, Doctor of Letters
P. J. O'Gara, Doctor of Science
R. A. Pearson, Doctor of Agriculture
John J. Pershing, Doctor of Laws
Roscoe Pound, Doctor of Civil Law
Theodore Roosevelt, Doctor of Civil Law
Charles S. Lobingier, Doctor of Civil Law
William L. Seibert, Doctor of Engineering
Raymond Eli Benedict, Master of Forestry
Clarence Curtis Culver, Doctor of Electrical Engineering
Charles R. Richards, Doctor of Engineering
Roscoe W. Thatcher, Doctor of Agriculture
Harold Gifford, Doctor of Laws
David Kinley, Doctor of Laws
John Holland Rose, Doctor of Laws
Charles W. Pugsley, Doctor of Agriculture
Sergei V. Rachmaninoff, Doctor of Music
William Granger Hastings, Doctor of Laws
Albert Watkins, Doctor of Laws
William Edwin Hardy, Master of Arts
Irving Samuel Cutter, Doctor of Science
Francis David Farrell, Doctor of Agriculture
Anson Marsten, Doctor of Engineering
John Eschelman Miller, Master of Arts
John Henry Weller, Civil Engineer
Francis La Flesche, Doctor of Letters
Willson Orton Bridges, Doctor of Laws
Cassius Asa Fisher, Doctor of Science
Robert Harshe, Doctor of Fine Arts
August Frederick Jonas, Doctor of Laws
Leila Mechlin, Doctor of Fine Arts
Frederick Blackmar Mumford, Doctor of
Sven Birger Sandzen, Doctor of Fine Arts
Lucius S. Storrs, Doctor of Engineering
John Edward Summers, Doctor of Laws
Herbert Silas Evans, Doctor of Engineering
Charles Newton Gould, Doctor of Science
Warren Abner Seavey, Doctor of Laws
Holmes Smith, Doctor of Fine Arts
Frederick Kenelm Nielsen, Doctor of Laws
Henry H. Wilson, Doctor of Laws
Francis Samuel Philbrick, Doctor of Laws
Grace Abbott, Doctor of Laws
Jay Brownlee Davidson, Doctor of Engineering
Willford Isbell King, Doctor of Laws
Harold VanBuren Magonigle, Doctor of
Malcolm Glen Wyer, Doctor of Library Science
Gustaf Waldemar Elmen, Doctor of Engineering
Derrick Norman Lehmer, Doctor of Science
Oscar Van Pelt Stout, Doctor of Engineering
Bess Streeter Aldrich, Doctor of Letters
James Stuart Dales, Doctor of Laws
Walter Bowers Pillsbury, Doctor of Laws
E. Parmelee Prentice, Doctor of Agriculture
Owen D.Young, Doctor of Laws
Samuel Avery, Doctor of Laws
Madison Bentley, Doctor of Laws
James William Crabtree, Doctor of Laws
Howard Hanson, Doctor of Music
George William Norris, Doctor of Laws
Charles Henry Purcell, Doctor of Engineering
Jesse Perry Rowe, Doctor of Science
Robert Gordon Sproul, Doctor of Laws
Henry Baldwin Ward, Doctor of Laws
Edward Charles Elliott, Doctor of Laws
Willets Herbert Sawyer, Doctor of Engineering
Christian L. Christensen, Doctor of Agriculture
Robert Anderson Gantt, Doctor of Engineering
Walter Jacob Wohlenberg, Doctor of Engineering
John Davidson Clark, Doctor of Laws
Dorothy Canfield Fisher, Doctor of Letters
Harry Levi Hollingworth, Doctor of Laws
Leta Stetter Hollingworth, Doctor of Laws
John Torrence Tate, Doctor of Science
William Linn Westermann, Doctor of Laws
Hartley Burr Alexander, Doctor of Letters
LaMonte Judson Belnap, Doctor of Engineering
Orien Wesley Fifer, Doctor of Laws
Frederic Benjamin Garver, Doctor of Laws
Ernest Emmanuel Howard, Doctor of Engineering
Frederick Maurice Hunter, Doctor of Laws
Frederic Edward Clements, Doctor of Laws
Gladys Henry Dick, Doctor of Laws
Alvin Saunders Johnson, Doctor of Laws
Joel Stebbins, Doctor of Laws
Alexander Jerry Stoddard, Doctor of Laws
Viola Florence Barnes, Doctor of Laws
Thomas Jean Hargrave, Doctor of Laws
Mark Morton, Doctor of Agriculture
John Chatfield Page, Doctor of Engineering
Arthur Sperry Pearse, Doctor of Laws
Karl Chandler Randall, Doctor of Engineering
Charles Michael Bracelen, Doctor of Laws
Frederick James Kelly, Doctor of Laws
Charles Franklin Kettering, Doctor of Engineering
Ralph Scott Mueller, Doctor of Engineering
John Todd Zimmer, Doctor of Science
Stanley Bracken, Doctor of Engineering
Eugene Edward Lundquist, Doctor of Engineering
Howard Remus Smith, Doctor of Agriculture
Edwin Harrison Brown, Doctor of Engineering
Edwin Ray Guthrie, Doctor of Laws
Edgar Franklin Howe, Master of Agriculture
Harry Clyde Ingles, Doctor of Engineering
Frank Henry Woods, Doctor of Laws
Ruth Frances Woodsmall, Doctor of Laws
Ernest Athern Bessey, Doctor of Laws
Ben Mark Cherrington, Doctor of Laws
Frederick Carl Holtz, Doctor of Engineering
Andrew Conway Ivy, Doctor of Science
Gilmour Byers MacDonald, Doctor of Agriculture
Charles W. McCorkle Poynter, Doctor of Science
John Cyprian Stevens, Doctor of Engineering
Ned Culbertson Abbott, Doctor of Laws
Alfred Washington Adson, Doctor of Science
Guy Thomas Buswell, Doctor of Laws
Josephine Chamberlin, Master of Nursing
John Wayne Delehant, Doctor of Laws
Harold Eugene Edgerton, Doctor of Engineering
Arthur Charles Bachmeyer, Doctor of Science
George Wells Beadle, Doctor of Science
Milton Stover Eisenhower, Doctor of Humane
James P. Growdon, Doctor of Engineering
Randolph T. Major, Doctor of Science
Ewald T. Grether, Doctor of Laws
Lloyd Ancile Jones, Doctor of Engineering
Alan Richards Moritz, Doctor of Science
Mari Susette Sandoz, Doctor of Literature
Arthur Bessey Smith, Doctor of Engineering
Harvey M. Johnsen, Doctor of Laws
Walter H. Judd, Doctor of Humanities
Samuel Roy McKelvie, Doctor of Agriculture
Harold Olaf Peterson, Doctor of Engineering
Cornelius V. Philip, Doctor of Science
Warren S. Thompson, Doctor of Laws
Joy Paul Guilford, Doctor of Laws
Henry Albert Jones, Doctor of Science
Trygve Halvdan Lie, Doctor of Laws
George Paul Luckey, Doctor of Engineering
Ruth O'Brien, Doctor of Science
Charles Augustus Weymuller, Doctor of Science
Edgar van Nuys Allen, Doctor of Science
Herbert Brownell, Jr., Doctor of Laws
Charles Mitchell Candy, Doctor of Engineering
Reuben Gilbert Gustavson, Doctor of Humanities
Jane Margueretta Hoey, Doctor of Humanities
Hazel Gertrude Kinscella, Doctor of Music
Harry Scott Smith, Doctor of Science
Frederick Adam Figi, Doctor of Science
Jay Wright Forrester, Doctor of Engineering
Howard Kramer Gray, Doctor of Science
Kenneth Fisher Warner, Doctor of Agriculture
Ivan Daley Wood, Doctor of Agriculture
Louis Christian Zopf, Doctor of Science
Elmer Clark Bratt, Doctor of Laws
Hollis Leland Caswell, Doctor of Laws
Arthur William Farrall, Doctor of Engineering
Donald Marion Pillsbury, Doctor of Science
Homer Leroy Shantz, Doctor of Laws
John Clare Whitehorn, Doctor of Science
Leslie Lewis Zook, Doctor of Science
Benjamin Albert Botkin, Doctor of Letters
Ward Darley, Doctor of Science
Alfred M. Gruenther, Doctor of Laws
Lee Alton Kilgore, Doctor of Engineering
Darryl Francis Zanuck, Doctor of Humanities
Clarence A. Davis, Doctor of Laws
Henry Margenau, Doctor of Science
Paul Bigelow Sears, Doctor of Laws
John Kent Selleck, Doctor of Laws
William Jay Turnbull, Doctor of Engineering
Franklin D. Murphy, Doctor of Science
George Fred Sprague, Doctor of Science
John Moore Allison, Doctor of Laws
Walter Dietrich Behlen, Doctor of Engineering
Milton E. Mohr, Doctor of Engineering
Charles Yoder Thompson, Doctor of Agriculture
Loren Corey Eisely, Doctor of Letters
Earl O. Heady, Doctor of Science
William Arthur McConnell, Doctor of Engineering
Gerald Lloyd Phillippe, Doctor of Laws
Howard F. Ahmanson, Doctor of Laws
Ruth M. Leverton, Doctor of Science
J. Lee Rankin, Doctor of Laws
Glenn Willard Burton, Doctor of Science
Arthur Thomas Jersild, Doctor of Laws
Milan James Kopac, Doctor of Science
Louis Carl Lundstrom, Doctor of Engineering
Donald Frederick Othmer, Doctor of Engineering
Carl M. Reinert, Doctor of Laws
Hazel Pearl Abel, Doctor of Laws
Samuel Miller Brownell, Doctor of Laws
G. Robert Coatney, Doctor of Science
Thomas James Hartford, Doctor of Science
Otto H. Liebers, Doctor of Laws
Anatole G. Mazour, Doctor of Laws
Georgian Adams, Doctor of Science
Arthur C. Bryan, Doctor of Laws
Peter Kiewit, Doctor of Laws
William Charles Norris, Doctor of Science
Wayne Otis Reed, Doctor of Laws
Vestor Joseph Skutt, Doctor of Laws
Percy Craig Spencer, Doctor of Laws
Theos Jardin Thompson, Doctor of Science
Samuel C. Waugh, Doctor of Laws
Wayne H. Worthington, Doctor of Engineering
Forrest Edwin Behm, Doctor of Laws
John Robert Brown, Doctor of Laws
Ihsan Dogramaci, Doctor of Laws
William O. Jones, Doctor of Science
Arjay Ray Miller, Doctor of Laws
Albert Henry Moseman, Doctor of Science
Elmo B. Roper, Jr., Doctor of Science
Lowell Thomas, Doctor of Laws
Earl Meloy Cline, Doctor of Laws
David Fellman, Doctor of Laws
Doretta Schlaphoff Hoffman, Doctor of Science
James Herbert Jensen, Doctor of Laws
Harold Frank Robinson, Doctor of Science
Edward Stanley, Doctor of Laws
Carruth J. Wagner, Doctor of Science
Robert Arnold Alberty, Doctor of Science
Merle Eugene Curti, Doctor of Letters
Robert Henry Dietz, Doctor of Science
Joseph McVicker Hunt, Doctor of Science
J. Martin Klotsche, Doctor of Laws
Joseph Grant Knapp, Doctor of Science
Aileene Simpson Lockhart, Doctor of Science
Hart Perry, Doctor of Laws
Ralph Johnson Bunche, Doctor of Humane Letters
John B. Dawson, Doctor of Laws
Joyce Clyde Hall, Doctor of Humanities
Henry Arnold Karo, Doctor of Science
William H. Kearns, Doctor of Laws
Donald Theodore Meier, Doctor of Laws
Wright Morris, Doctor of Letters
Vance D. Rogers, Doctor of Humane Letters
Sam Foster Seeley, Doctor of Science
Lee C. White, Doctor of Laws
Laurens Williams, Doctor of Laws
Virgil Edward Boyd, Doctor of Laws
Robert F. Goheen, Doctor of Laws
J. George Harrar, Doctor of Laws
Margaret I. Liston, Doctor of Science
Martha Groves McKelvie, Doctor of Humane
Reuben Nakian, Doctor of Fine Arts
Francis P. Schmitt, Doctor of Music
Olga Nielsen Sheldon, Doctor of Humane Letters
Theodore C. Sorensen, Doctor of Laws
Adrian Morris Srb, Doctor of Science
C. Dwight Waldo, Doctor of Letters
Edwin John Wellhausen, Doctor of Science
Sarah Ladd Woods, Doctor of Humane Letters
Whitney M. Young, Jr., Doctor of Humane Letters
Paul Babson, Doctor of Laws
John C. Brauer, Doctor of Science
Gerald Franklin Briggs, Doctor of Engineering
E. Christian Buehler, Doctor of Humane Letters
Ellsworth Prouty Conkle, Doctor of Literature
Edwin Dickinson, Doctor of Fine Arts
R. Lynn Galloway, Doctor of Humanities
Lewis W. Harris, Doctor of Science
Henrietta Fleck Houghton, Doctor of Science
Otto Kotouc, Sr., Doctor of Humanities
Robert John Moes, Doctor of Science
Orville A. Vogel, Doctor of Agriculture
Claude Emerson Welch, Doctor of Science
William Hubert Allaway, Doctor of Science
J. Kenneth Cozier, Doctor of Humane Letters
Martin Marc Cummings, Doctor of Science
James M. Earl, Doctor of Science
Clarence Allen Forbes, Doctor of Letters
John D. Hicks, Doctor of Letters
Carlos Lleras-Restrepo, Doctor of Laws
Felber Maasdam, Doctor of Laws
Joseph J. Martin, Doctor of Science
Robert M. Spire, Doctor of Humane Letters
Willis A. Strauss, Doctor of Laws
Gustave Otto Arlt, Doctor of Humane Letters
Henry M. Beachell, Doctor of Agriculture
William C. Keettel, Doctor of Science
Waldo Rudolph Wedel, Doctor of Science
Harland J. Cleveland, Doctor of Humane Letters
Edwin H. Colbert, Doctor of Science
Eugene Holland, Doctor of Laws
Eugene A. Leahy, Doctor of Laws
John P. McGovern, Doctor of Science
Mary Lois Murphy, Doctor of Science
Mary Riepma Ross, Doctor of Laws
Ralph Winfred Taylor, Doctor of Science
George W. Ferguson, Doctor of Science
Jan de Hartog, Doctor of Humanities
Marion L. Jackson, Doctor of Science
General David C. Jones, Doctor of Humane Letters
Very Reverend Joseph Labaj, Doctor of Humanities
James A. Michener, Doctor of Letters
J. Edward Murray, Doctor of Letters
Roy M. Robbins, Doctor of Humane Letters
Robert E. Schellberg, Doctor of Laws
Joseph W. Seacrest, Doctor of Humane Letters
Ralph W. Tyler, Doctor of Science
Ernest F. Witte, Doctor of Humane Letters
Harold W. Andersen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Daniel E. Atkinson, Doctor of Science
Oets K. Bouwsma, Doctor of Letters
Theodore L. Eliot, Jr., Doctor of Laws
Henry Fonda, Doctor of Humanities
Philip G. Johnson, Doctor of Science
Edward H. Levi, Doctor of Laws
Abdullah Malikyar, Doctor of Laws
Ghulam Sadeeq Mohibbi, Doctor of Humane
Thomas S. Nurnberger, Doctor of Laws
Jessie M. Scott, Doctor of Science
Wayne O. Southwick, Doctor of Science
Ralph Wardle, Doctor of Humane Letters
Frank H. Woods, Doctor of Laws
Julius Bellson, Master of Music
Milo L. Cox, Doctor of Agriculture
Leo A. Daly, Doctor of Laws
General Russell F. Dougherty, Doctor of Laws
Aaron Douglas, Doctor of Fine Arts
Gerald F. Else, Doctor of Letters
Gerald R. Ford, Doctor of Laws
Warren H. Gabelman, Doctor of Science
Reuben R. Jensen, Doctor of Laws
Morris F. Miller, Doctor of Laws
Gaafar Mohamed Niemeiry, Doctor of Laws
Claude Organ, Jr., Doctor of Humane Letters
Richard D. Winchell, Doctor of Laws
Robin W. Winks, Doctor of Letters
Robert C. Holland, Doctor of Laws
Roman L. Hruska, Doctor of Humane Letters
Father Robert P. Hupp, Doctor of Humane Letters
R. Stewart Jones, Doctor of Humane Letters
Saul Kripke, Doctor of Humane Letters
Lewis W. Lehr, Doctor of Science
Wallace N. Rasmussen, Doctor of Science
A. V. Sorensen, Doctor of Laws
B. Rodney Bertramson, Doctor of Agriculture
F. Edward Borchers, Doctor of Laws
Clifford M. Hardin, Doctor of Humane Letters
John C. Kenefick, Doctor of Laws
Ross McCollum, Doctor of Laws
Gretchen Swanson Pullen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Mary Helen Richards, Doctor of Music
Morris F. Skinner, Doctor of Science
August George Swanson, Doctor of Science
Sherman S. Welpton, Jr., Doctor of Laws
Joseph D. Williams, Doctor of Pharmacy
Frank Walker Johnson, Doctor of Science
Norman Malcolm, Doctor of Humanities
Margaret McNamara, Doctor of Literature
Tillie Olsen, Doctor of Arts and Literature
Fred Patterson, Doctor of Science
Andrew Pattullo, Doctor of Science
Dale TeKolste, Doctor of Laws
Jack K. Wickstrom, Doctor of Science
Flavel A. Wright, Doctor of Laws
Roy Emil Blaser, Doctor of Science
Robert P. Giovacchini, Doctor of Science
Wilhelmina F. Jashemski, Doctor of Humanities
James C. Olson, Doctor of Letters
Wally Provost, Doctor of Letters
John S. Savage, Bachelor of Arts
Gerald H. Trautman, Doctor of Laws
Willard James Visek, Doctor of Science
Robert G. Volz, Doctor of Science
Magdalena Wagner, Doctor of Science
Myrtle K. Aydelotte, Doctor of Science
Rafael Caldera, Doctor of Humane Letters
John M. Christlieb, Doctor of Humane Letters
Eugene A. Conley, Doctor of Science
General Richard H. Ellis, Doctor of Laws
Rex C. Higley, Doctor of Pharmacy
Sir Andrew Watt Kay, Doctor of Science
Maurice L. Peterson, Doctor of Science
Durward B. Varner, Doctor of Laws
Dick Cavett, Doctor of Humane Letters
Helen Cherniack, Doctor of Humane Letters
Robert B. Daugherty, Doctor of Humane Letters
John G. Freymann, Doctor of Science
William E. Larson, Doctor of Science
O. Burr Ross, Doctor of Science
Edwin Van den Bark, Doctor of Science
Harry A. Blackmun, Doctor of Laws
Donald C. Cox, Doctor of Science
Paul H. Harvey, Doctor of Science
John W. Henderson, Doctor of Science
Paul H. Henson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Lawrence R. Klein, Doctor of Science
Fred W. McLafferty, Doctor of Science
Joseph G. Noh, Doctor of Science
Henry Pascale, Doctor of Humane Letters
Walter Scott, Jr., Doctor of Letters
Fred Waring, Doctor of Arts & Letters
John W. White, Jr., Doctor of Humane Letters
Sir Oliver Wright, Doctor of Humane Letters
Otto F. Baumann, Doctor of Humane Letters
R. L. "Dick" Herman, Doctor of Humane Letters
Peter Hermes, Doctor of Humane Letters
Shirley Hill, Doctor of Humane Letters
David H. Murdock, Doctor of Humane Letters
Ned S. Raun, Doctor of Science
Richard A. Schleusener, Doctor of Science
Eugene W. Skinner, Doctor of Humane Letters
Henry Nash Smith, Doctor of Letters
Robert H. Storz, Doctor of Science
Robert W. Allington, Doctor of Science
Robert Anderson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Malcolm Baldrige, Doctor of Letters
Rabbi Sidney Brooks, Doctor of Humane Letters
Melvin R. Gibson, Doctor of Science
John L. Holland, Doctor of Letters
Philip Johnson, Doctor of Letters
Herbert C. Modlin, Doctor of Science
Charles Peebler, Doctor of Humane Letters
John W. Reps, Doctor of Arts & Letters
Paul C. Schorr, III, Doctor of Humane Letters
Sam Segnar, Doctor of Law
Gladys E. Sorenson, Doctor of Science
Richard M. Bressler, Doctor of Humane Letters
Flavia Waters Champe, Doctor of Humane Letters
Charles M. Harper, Doctor of Humane Letters
Theodore Hesburgh, Doctor of Laws
Tom S. Miya, Doctor of Science
Mary Jean Mulvaney, Doctor of Humane Letters
Joseph L. Parker, Doctor of Science
Charles John Tupper, Doctor of Science
Lloyd Dale Van Vleck, Doctor of Science
Dale E. Wolf, Doctor of Science
Norman H. Cromwell, Doctor of Science
Adele Coryelle Hall, Doctor of Humane Letters
Christina Hixson, Doctor of Humane Letters
F. Kenneth Iverson, Doctor of Laws
William Jovanovich, Doctor of Laws
Eugene Kamprath, Doctor of Science
Marilyn Mason, Doctor of Music
James E. Olson, Doctor of Laws
Kazuo Takechi, Doctor of Humane Letters
Thomas R. Thomsen, Doctor of Science
Varro E. Tyler, Doctor of Science
Austin L. Vickery, Jr., Doctor of Science
James P. Collman, Doctor of Science
Steve A. Eberhart, Doctor of Science
W. Grant Gregory, Doctor of Humane Letters
Yorio Hinuma, Doctor of Science
Ralph Leonard Ireland, Doctor of Science
Ding Shi-Sun, Doctor of Science
William C. Smith, Doctor of Laws
Joseph Soshnik, Doctor of Humane Letters
Beryl W. Sprinkel, Doctor of Laws
Cecil L. Wittson, Doctor of Science
Han Xu, Doctor of Laws
Clayton K. Yeutter, Doctor of Laws
Gene A. Budig, Doctor of Humane Letters
Warren Buffett, Doctor of Humane Letters
Donald J. Cram, Doctor of Science
Charles W. Durham, Doctor of Humane Letters
Margre H. Durham, Doctor of Humane Letters
Carroll M. Leevy, Doctor of Science
Leon S. McGoogan, Doctor of Science
Stuart O. Nelson, Doctor of Science
John Milton Roberts, Doctor of Letters
Milo B. Tesar, Doctor of Science
Charles Thone, Doctor of Laws
Joseph D. Williams, Doctor of Science
Kathryn Elaine Barnard, Doctor of Science
Gretchen G. Berggren, Doctor of Science
Warren L. Berggren, Doctor of Science
Herman Cain, Doctor of Science
Donald O. Clifton, Doctor of Humane letters
Jack A. MacAllister, Doctor of Science
John W. Madden, Jr., Doctor of Laws
Radim Palous, Doctor of Humane Letters
Donald R. Ross, Doctor of Laws
Mike Royko, Doctor of Humane Letters
James Stuart, Sr., Doctor of Humane Letters
Daniel W. Cook, III, Doctor of Humane Letters
Michael J.C. Echeruo, Doctor of Humane Letters
George Klein, Doctor of Science
Eva Klein, Doctor of Science
A. Bruce Maunder, Doctor of Science
Elwood N. Thompson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Forrest E. Behm, Doctor of Humane Letters
Ada S. Hinshaw, Doctor of Science
Hubert Locke, Doctor of Humane Letters
Barney Oldfield, Doctor of Letters
W. Ann Reynolds, Doctor of Humane Letters
Phil Schrager, Doctor of Letters
John Sculley, Doctor of Humane Letters
Virginia Smith, Doctor of Laws
Viorel Barbu, Doctor of Letters
James B. Coffman, Doctor of Science
Mary Gray, Doctor of Laws
Bernice Harris, Doctor of Humane Letters
Norman Y. Harris, Doctor of Humane Letters
Leland S. Holdt, Doctor of Humane Letters
Martin Marty, Doctor of Letters
Edwin C. Nelson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Samuel D. Proctor, Doctor of Humane Letters
Marvin G. Schmid, Doctor of Humane Letters
Virginia C. Schmid, Doctor of Humane Letters
F. Gene Dixon, Doctor of Science
Claudia Goldin, Doctor of Humane Letters
Frances Hesselbein, Doctor of Humane Letters
Clifton K. Hillegass, Doctor of Humane Letters
Nobuyuki Ito, Doctor of Science
Howard R. Lamar, Doctor of Letters
C. Peter Magrath, Doctor of Letters
Val L. Fitch, Doctor of Science
J. Leonard Goldner, Doctor of Science
Kermit R. Hansen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Ulrich Littmann, Doctor of Humane Letters
Dorothy H. Olson, Doctor of Science
Leland J. Olson, Doctor of Science
Steven B. Sample, Doctor of Letters
James L. Woodress, Doctor of Letters
Augusto Boal, Doctor of Humane Letters
Myron K. Brakke, Doctor of Science
Marvin H. Caruthers, Doctor of Science
Paulo Freire, Doctor of Humane Letters
Shirley Goldstein, Doctor of Humane Letters
Frank W. Hale, Jr., Doctor of Humane Letters
Raymond A. Hicks, Doctor of Humane Letters
Merle Hinrichs, Doctor of Humane Letters
Libby Larsen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Hugh Sidey, Doctor of Humane Letters
Melig Sipahioglu, Doctor of Humane Letters
Thomas C. Sorensen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Donald M. Stewart, Doctor of Humane Letters
J. James Exon, Doctor of Humane Letters
Peter J. Gomes, Doctor of Humane Letters
Moshe Katsav, Doctor of Humane Letters
William McBain Kizer, Doctor of Humane Letters
Trudy Lieberman, Doctor of Humane Letters
Henry M. Munger, Doctor of Science
Franklin A. Sonn, Doctor of Humane Letters
Leroy B. Townsend, Doctor of Science
Tom H. Allan, Doctor of Humane Letters
William Sloane Coffin, Doctor of Humane Letters
Roger Kennedy, Doctor of Letters
Norman Krivosha, Doctor of Laws
Menahem Pressler, Doctor of Music
Marion Marsh Brown, Doctor of Humane Letters
John I. Goodlad, Doctor of Humane Letters
Vinod Gupta, Doctor of Humane Letters
Denham Harman, Doctor of Science
Alan J. Heeger, Doctor of Science
George W. Lundeen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Kay A. Orr, Doctor of Humane Letters
Paul Volcker, Doctor of Philosophy
Patricia S. Broder, Doctor of Letters
President William Jefferson Clinton, Doctor of
Humane Letters
Natalie D. Hahn, Doctor of Humane Letters
Eugeniu Hriscev, Doctor of Letters
Stanley Ikenberry, Doctor of Humane Letters
Charles A. Mebus, Doctor of Sciences
Thomas E. Starzl, Doctor of Science
Desmond Tutu, Doctor of Humane Letters
Hans Brisch, Doctor of Letters
Bruce Chabner, Doctor of Science
Robert Hemenway, Doctor of Letters
James E. Miller, Doctor of Letters
Nancy J. Andreason, Doctor of Humane Letters
Hal France, Doctor of Letters
Mikhail Gorbachev, Doctor of Laws
Charles Holland, Doctor of Letters
Guinter Kahn, Doctor of Science
William R. Nester, Doctor of Humane Letters
Dumitru Oprea, Doctor of Letters
Mary Louise Hanson Pritchard, Doctor of Science
Lee Simmons, Doctor of Science
Victor Yampolsky, Doctor of Letters
Rita Colwell, Doctor of Letters
James W. Cronin, Doctor of Science
Richard K. Davidson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Stephen R. Lawhead, Doctor of Humane Letters
Admiral Richard W. Mies, Doctor of Laws
Frank Morrison, Doctor of Humane Letters
Richard Riley, Doctor of Laws
Marla E. Salmon, Doctor of Science
Mary Zimmerman, Doctor of Letters
Marian Battey Andersen, Doctor of Humane
Paul Berg, Doctor of Science
Ted Kooser, Doctor of Letters
Joseph M. McFadden, Doctor of Humane Letters
Alexander Payne, Doctor of Humane Letters
Jack Pulec, Doctor of Science
Maxine F. Singer, Doctor of Science
John Beasley, Doctor of Humane Letters
Doug Bereuter, Doctor of Humane Letters
Linda Cronenwett, Doctor of Science
Phyllis Hunhoff, Doctor of Humane Letters
Hamid Karzai, Doctor of Letters
Ben Kuroki, Doctor of Letters
Ann Mactier, Doctor of Education
Paige Mulhollan, Doctor of Letters
Lilian Faust, Doctor of Letters
Jun Kaneko, Doctor of Humane Letters
John W. Kenagy, Doctor of Science
Peter G. Peterson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Claude M. Bolton, Jr., Doctor of Science
Charles H. Brim, Doctor of Science
Daniel Rusk Brooks, Doctor of Science
Sam Fried, Doctor of Humane Letters
Vard R. Johnson, Doctor of Humane Letters
Mahabir Pun, Doctor of Humane Letters
David Satcher, Doctor of Science
John Gottschalk, Doctor of Letters
Lawrence Tabak, Doctor of Science
Ronald W. Roskens, Doctor of Humane Letters
Eugene Cordes, Doctor of Science
Le Kang, Doctor of Science
Paul A. Johnsgard, Doctor of Science
Jeffrey S. Raikes, Doctor of Letters
Xiaoming Shen, Doctor of Science
Alberto Ibarguen, Doctor of Humane Letters
Louis W. Sullivan, Doctor of Science
Nanning Zheng, Doctor of Science
Richard Holland, Doctor of Humane Letters
Geng Pei, Doctor of Science
Harold H. Saunders, Doctor of Humane Letters
Kimberly Siniscalchi, Doctor of Health Sciences
Updated August 2013
Peter Kiewit Student Entrepreneurial Award
The Peter Kiewit Student Entrepreneurial Award is designed to recognize University of Nebraska students who have directed their energies, ideas, and talents toward community and business improvements with the creative and innovative use of information technology.
2014 Award Winner: Enactus
This year's Kiewit award winner is the Enactus ("Entrepreneurship Action and Us") team at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Enactus owns three student-run businesses at UNL whose profits allow the team to support a variety of community outreach projects, each related to business or entrepreneurship. For example, Enactus supports the LisaMom Foundation, which aids Nebraska families affected by cancer by providing meals, cleaning, lawn care, child care and other services.
Enactus also has partnered with a nonprofit organization in Sri Lanka that helps women there gain independence by selling their handmade jewelry. To expand the potential market for the women, Enactus students are using social media and online marketplaces to connect local businesses with the nonprofit, in hopes of bringing the jewelry to Nebraska shoppers. In a separate project, the Enactus team is partnering with a cooperative farming community in Zambia to help provide financial education to local farmers. The students have developed a technology-based curriculum to help teach the farmers about business, budgeting, basic economics, financial literacy and other important topics. With the lessons, delivered via information technology, the students hope to help the farmers be more profitable.
Enactus supports these and other projects with profits from student-run businesses on campus: coffee shops in the College of Business Administration and Jorgensen Hall, and an eBay business that provides UNL departments the opportunity to sell surplus inventory.
"The students of Enactus have shown remarkable creativity, leadership and an ability to know what people need – and how to leverage technology and use creative funding strategies to help them get it," Milliken said. "While still in school, these UNL students have already begun successful careers in social entrepreneurship. Their talents are already making a difference in communities both in Nebraska and around the world, and I could not be more proud of their spirit, commitment and intelligent activism that is yielding such positive results."
Murphy Larson, a senior majoring in finance and marketing who serves as internal vice president of Enactus, said the team will use its award to advance its project in Zambia.
"The UNL Enactus students believe that entrepreneurship has the power to change communities and peoples' lives for the better," Larson said. "We are honored and humbled to have received the Peter Kiewit Student Entrepreneurial Award. We believe this award will help us to have an even stronger impact on the people we serve in Lincoln and around the world. We're grateful to the University of Nebraska for creating an environment in which student entrepreneurship is taught, encouraged and rewarded."
Honorary Degrees Recipients-Alphabetical
Printable listing
Updated October 2012
Walter Scott Entrepreneurial Business Award
The Walter Scott Entrepreneurial Business Award is designed to encourage existing businesses with a presence in Nebraska to create partnerships and links with the University of Nebraska in the area of technology.
Past Recipients
If you can not view the PDF files, download the free Adobe Acrobat Reader.
2014 Award Winner: Hollman Media, LLC
This year's Scott award winner is Hollman Media, LLC, a Kearney-based web development business founded by University of Nebraska at Kearney graduates Travis and Angela Hollman. The company – whose staff is made up almost entirely of UNK students and alumni – develops mobile apps and other web-based business solutions. Hollman Media will re-invest its prize back into the university by working with UNK to create a new technology internship program designed to create hands-on learning opportunities for student interns who want to help develop digital technology.
Hollman Media is a frequent and engaging partner to the university. The company hires interns from multiple UNK departments, provides speakers for campus events and has developed web-based solutions that directly benefit UNK, including an online ticketing system for UNK Athletics and a weather notification system that allows UNK to more quickly alert the community to cancellations. Hollman Media is currently developing the "Kearney App," an app that will leverage mobile technology to better attract visitors and new businesses to the Kearney area. The project involves major businesses and organizations in the city, including UNK – giving Hollman Media interns a unique opportunity to work directly with community leaders.
Additionally, Hollman Media is working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop a mobile app based on the work of USDA researchers in Nebraska that could be used by cattle producers around the country. An earlier app developed by the company, My StuffFinder, was featured in the New York Times last year.
"Hollman Media is the kind of entrepreneurial success story we hope to encourage and facilitate: It started with two University of Nebraska graduates who started with little beyond a great idea and the drive to see it through," Milliken said. "Today they are successful business owners who are helping to create jobs, keep talent in Nebraska and grow the innovation economy in Kearney and around the state. I am tremendously proud of Travis and Angela Hollman and I thank them for their continued partnership with the university. I'm confident we will see many more great things from their company."
Travis Hollman, president and managing member, said the company's decision to commit its prize to a new internship program at UNK embodied the spirit of the Scott award.
"Winning an award as prestigious as the one bearing Walter Scott's name is a high point in anyone's career. We are honored and humbled to be permanently added to the list of distinguished businesses who have already won this award," Hollman said. "UNK and the other University of Nebraska campuses consistently set the bar when it comes to reaching out to the business community and incentivizing companies to create partnerships in the area of technology. The Scott award is a terrific example of that."