Cap And Trade: Get The Lowdown

Recent surveys about public perceptions of climate change and knowledge of cap-and-trade in the United States show that a lot of people out there haven't got the foggiest idea what's going on. Here's the principle of cap-and-trade laid out in the most simple terms possible:

Read the whole story

Comments

[cannante]

every being in the world should resist cap and trade silliness until every human being gets a cash allowance, or a carbon allotment, too.

the idea of the world creating machines that will become smarter than humans may not happen, but our creating a machine that will control us out of our lives we have done already

it's called the corporation.

[DocSkull]

It seems to me that you are using the dangers of corporations to argue against their regulation.

[research]

Let's include some facts please: the coal companies get billions of dollar in carbon credit, no doubt a reward for their primary role in polluting the atmosphere.

Cap and trade crashes.

Cap and trade was designed by the Goldman Sach Banksters as

the largest new dereiavite3s playground ever created.

We trust the Banksters to do the right things,

Right??????

[DocSkull]

Goldman Sachs came up with cap and trade? Do you have some supporting material?

[research]

http://www.goldmansachs666.com/2009/07/goldman-sachs-and-cap-and-trade-jackpot.html

[gulfofmexico1]

I work for a large utility company. We are expecting rates to go up 19% -50% becauseof cap and trade. Pure and simple it is a tax on the rate payers.

[econ1]

It is step two....where the permits get distributed...that is the main issue.

Friends of the government get permits worth billions of dollars based on .... politics....if history is any guide.

The trading benefit to Goldman Sachs and the rest of the banks is just a minor issue.

[buckeyedave]

I think it's fitting that they picture two stacks emitting only the most effective greenhouse gas on earth. Dihydrogen monoxide.

[Richard2]

60% of the production cost for aluminum production is electricity. Historically aluminum producers have located where electricity is cheap.

Cap and trade will sharply drive up the cost of electricity to everyone in the United States. Aluminum producers in developed nations will have to close down, and relocate to the undeveloped nations, where such severe penalties will not be applied to them.

Cap and trade will destroy the metal working industries in all the advanced nations of the world. As the metal working industries provide the materials for many manufacturing industries, the effect of cap and trade will be to harm many of the manufacturing industries, by driving up the cost of materials, or forcing them to purchase materials only available from the undeveloped nations.

[jsarets]

Or we could levy import tariffs on foreign aluminum commensurate with the price of carbon credits in America and the carbon intensity of aluminum production in the exporting nation.

[Richard2]

Yes, and we will have no jobs in the metals or manufacturing areas. The jobs will all be in the "underdeveloped world." What will they accept in payment?

[lightningbolt]

The fines from cap and trade should all be invested in clean renewable energy.

[jsarets]

You're on the right track...

But we can't trust the government to invest wisely (e.g. corn ethanol), so it's better to divide the revenues equally into each unit of non-fossil energy production as a consumer price subsidy.

The transfer subsidy would greatly benefit early-adopters and rapidly attract new producers and consumers. The market would be free to innovate, and solutions that involve less carbon footprint -- waste biofuels instead of commodity crop biofuels, for example -- would have lower exposure to the cost of carbon credits.

[gulfofmexico1]

under cap and trade, hydro power is not a renewable energy but burning old tires as biomass is considered renewable. Currently, my elec utility uses 2% renewable with a mandate to get to 22% by 2020. I heard they are going to sign a contract with a wind company out west. It is going to be real expansive, hold on to your wallets.

[chapluqa]

Cap and trade is a scam, designed to benefit the same corporate interests who seem to dominate most policy making in the world these days.
A serious emissions reduction policy would include a carbon tax or absolute limits on how much CO2 could be emitted by a given industry or company.
But at this late stage in the game, reducing emissions by X% will not be enough to prevent the most serious climate change effects, and we will most likely hit those dreaded 'tipping points' anyway. What we need to do starting now is to get as much carbon out of the air as possible. The easiest way to do this is to use natural systems, namely plants and biomass to store carbon from the air.
All the talk and argument about cap and trade and emissions reduction is just a continuation of the distract, deny and delay tactics....and the media is just eating it up.

[Brendan H]

How about we just fine people for polluting. The incentive is to reduce fines by not polluting.

[MacQ]

"If the U.S. passed a cap and trade and other countries did not, it wouldn't work. It would ruin the U.S. economy and it wouldn't save the climate either." --Dr. Steve Running, co-author of the Nobel Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's report on global warming

[BannedNBoston]

Lord Monkton explains cap and trades European failure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFJKBgDu1LY

[MyTake]

Since Cap N Trade is a global enterprise and all transactions will pass through international banks, it is these banks that stand to profit most. And when Rothschild backed banks handle the bulk of these transactions, well then this Cap N Trade is yet nothing more that another financial scam.

[BannedNBoston]

What we need is a coal tax payable to the states.

[jsarets]

Unfortunately, this article leaves out the crucial flaw in the cap-and-trade scheme:

The carbon credit market isn't just open to polluters, with those more successful at reducing emissions selling excess credits to those who were less successful, as the article implies.

This is a commodity derivative market open to financial speculators, who will attempt to buy low from the successful polluters and sell high to the less successful polluters, taking a profit on trading.

This speculation will inflate the price of the credits by creating artificial demand, speculators competing with polluters for a limited supply of credits that only the polluters actually need.

As much as I fully support the basic intention of cap-and-trade, I cannot condone the unintended consequences, which will let Wall Street hijack the prices of most goods for private profit.

The correct way to do this is simple:

There are a limited number of corporations that produce or import coal, oil, or gas. Cap the carbon content of the fossil fuel supply. Treasury conducts scheduled auctions of non-transferable carbon permits open only to these suppliers, who pay fines for selling more than their permitted share.

Government spends the auction revenue by dividing it equally into each unit of non-fossil energy production as a consumer price subsidy. This system is inherently fair about energy sources with complicated life-cycle footprints, such as biofuels with different feedstocks and production methods.

[Philclock]

A big slogan for 60's progressives was "Question Authority".

Progressive slogans today: "Single Payer Authority"; "Finance Authority"; "Cap-and-trade Authority"; "Racist Authority"; "Politically Correct Speech Authority"; "Diversity Authority"; "Same Sex Marriage Authority"; "Climate Change Authority"; etc.

When did Authority become the answer?

[davidly]

I hardly see these as examples of the authority of oppression - as you seem to understand it - but an answer to authority. It is, after all, authoritative dictates which tell us that homosexuals cannot marry, or that corporations have the same rights as the individual, granting them the authority to act against our best interest.

The cases which seem to indicate otherwise are just further examples of one mafia getting the upper hand on another. Still, I think your comment is one-sided.

[Philclock]

You got my point, someone truly questioning authority does not, IMHO, simply substitute another authority, but develops other avenues for free expression.

Such as civil unions which, if effective, allow the same privileges from the State as "marriage".

Your corporations example doesn't hold up; allowing people to gather and act in concert as an individual in order to transact business grants more flexibility, and less complexity, in conducting business transactions.

That's how this country came about, didn't it, questioning authority, not finding a new authority.

And that's why I'm surprised at so-called "progressives" going not for freedom, but a New Authority, which as the "Who" might say is same as the Old Authority.