More

No Carbon Cap? Company Transparency Could Make Up For It

First Posted: 04/18/10 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 04:30 PM ET

Carbon

Grist:

If we can't yet require companies to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants, can we shame them into doing it?

The Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Congress have not so far succeeded in forcing big polluters to cut greenhouse-gas emissions. But the U.S. EPA is about to force them to report their greenhouse-gas emissions.

Big whoop, you say? Well, actually, it might be.

Read the whole story: Grist

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

If we can't yet require companies to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants, can we shame them into doing it? The Obama administration and Democratic leaders in C...
If we can't yet require companies to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants, can we shame them into doing it? The Obama administration and Democratic leaders in C...
Filed by Gazelle Emami  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:02 PM on 02/18/2010
Think Sachs and friends are getting nervous yet? This won't make them a dime.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:53 PM on 02/18/2010
I love that the NRDC is quoted, since they have been CENTRAL to the push to allow super-polluters to get all their "carbon credits" for FREE via the US-cap "parntership." GE, Dow, Shell - all the worst of the worst have cozied up to NRDC and Nature Conservancy and Environmental Defense to greenwash the LIES of the Waxman-Markey disaster and promote Free Pollution To The Biggest Pigs:

http://www.us-cap.org/

NRDC, Wilderness Society, Sierra Club and Nature Conservancy have CONSISTENTLY come down on the side of Big Energy and Big Polluters and against ecosystems, the planet and the 99% of us who aren't Big Energy dirtbags. No credibility.
05:27 PM on 02/17/2010
Interesting... A month ago this type of article would be crawling with lib posters... Today it is silent... Have lefties finally given up the scam?
03:58 PM on 02/17/2010
Shaming them? What are you taking one from the playbook of the Religion of Peace? Why not make them wear burka's and stone them in public if they show skin. What a scam. This is just more evidence the Climate Hoax is truly a religion.
01:20 PM on 02/17/2010
Corporations have no shame and they never do anything voluntarily other than make more profits. Our experience with banks should teach us this very valuable lesson. We need regulation NOW!
04:03 PM on 02/17/2010
Profits pay taxes, wages, health insurance, benefits, pensions, feed families, children, fund national defense, pay for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Census. Yes. All of the taxes on Profits pay for the regulation you love. I know how much you sympathize with the proletariat, but repeating the Bolshevik revolution is not going to cure the misguided view of the world you have.
04:48 PM on 02/17/2010
Well said!
04:51 PM on 02/17/2010
Corporations are nothing more than small businesses trying to minimize the devastating effects of crushing regulation by out of control govt bureaucrats and TICS - poliTICians.
12:19 PM on 02/17/2010
Maybe the warmers should get some new scientists.

"This news report discusses my work on the Chinese weather-station data, but provides no references for that work. The main reference is this: Keenan, D. J. Energy & Environment, 18, 985-995 (2007). It is freely available on the web.
The news report also misrepresents my allegations.
My principal allegation is that some of the data on station histories never existed. Specifically, Jones et al. (1990) claim to have sourced their data from a report that was published by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Yet for 49 of the 84 meteorological stations that Jones et al. relied upon, the DOE/CAS Report states “station histories are not currently available†and “details regarding instrumentation, collection methods, changes in station location or observing times … are not known“. Those statements imply that the quoted claim from Jones et al. is impossible: “stations were selected on the basis of station history: we chose those with few, if any, changes in instrumentation, location or observation timesâ€. My paper presents more details; some updates are available via http://www.informath.org/apprise/a5620.htm .
12:01 PM on 02/17/2010
Where do we go from here?

What is the next great hoax coming from the

the environmentalist/communist agitators?
05:18 PM on 02/17/2010
Their next step is to simply force it upon us thru EPA and other govt control agencies.
11:57 AM on 02/17/2010
And here we have the last gasps,

and final emissions of a dying, fraudulent movement.
11:43 AM on 02/17/2010
shaming them,,,, Like shaming the cultists of Global Warming with the exposures of their fraudulent data like East Anglia , and exposing the fact that the temps have changed little over the last 15 years and that CO2 has little to do with Climate Change,,, I am all for it
11:51 AM on 02/17/2010
Well. When you put it THAT way, I am all for it too!!!
09:41 AM on 02/17/2010
Just tax their energy use.
09:12 AM on 02/17/2010
Shaming them? Try the free market.