Cap and Dividend

A proposed anti-global warming bill would help the U.S. make a fair, affordable transition to a clean-energy, low-carbon economy, and avoid the pitfalls of other climate bills that pander to the coal-burning utilities.

The Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012, and if we don't do something BIG to really start reducing greenhouse gas emissions after that, we are screwed in a big, Emmerich-movie-like way.

I don't blame Dorgan and Pomeroy for being sceptical of the "postage stamp" strategy. Their state will face major costs, and the strategy puts supporters at risk in the 2010 or 2012 elections.

Fuel and electricity costs are highly visible, but under Waxman-Markey, the benefits to consumers will be mostly invisible.

It would be as if the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 legislated monetary policy through 1940. Ridiculous, right? I mean, who had the crystal ball to predict that Great Depression thing?

Unfortunately, the economics of estimating how much climate policy might cost households has almost as many variables and feedback loops as climate science.

Two climate change bills were introduced last week. If we liken these two bills to race horses, they have just left the gate and they have many laps still to go

Enter the Great Third Way, more formally known as cap-and-dividend. The cap part is familiar--a set number of pollution permits would be auctioned off...

A cap-and-dividend system would move energy markets toward clean fuels while generating billions of dollars in monthly dividend checks shared equally by all American families, guaranteed.

If environmental protection is a "luxury," then developing countries should emit as much as they need to, then when they're wealthier, create environmental laws to deal with the mess.

Here's an entertaining, possibly emerging trend I should have predicted: cartoons used to explain green issues or technologies. Last week, someone se...