Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Carbon Taxes Versus Carbon Markets

Recommended Posts

Carbon Taxes Versus Carbon Markets

What's the best way to limit emissions?

Ronald Bailey | May 24, 2007

While carbon taxes are preferred by many policy analysts, proposals for carbon markets dominate Capitol Hill. For example, Senator John McCain, one of the leading Republican candidates for president, said in February that “any responsible climate change measure must have rational, mandatory emission reduction targets and timetables,” and it “must utilize a market-based, economy wide ‘cap-and-trade’ system.” McCain is a co-sponsor, with Senator Joe Lieberman, of the Climate Stewardship Act, which would establish a nationwide limit on greenhouse gas emissions and then issue permits to emit greenhouse gases. The McCain-Lieberman bill ambitiously aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions by almost 60 percent below what they would otherwise have been in 2030. Companies that have low emissions could sell their emissions rights to companies that find it expensive to reduce their own emissions.
Cap-and-trade schemes for reducing pollutants have a lot going for them. First, many businesses favor them. Second, we already have an American example of a similar market that works. Third, carbon markets are accepted under international treaties and already exist abroad. Fourth, most environmental groups like cap-and-trade systems because they set firm limits on actual emissions. And, fifth, in theory at least, the flexibility of carbon markets enables businesses to figure out the least expensive way to reduce overall emissions.
I'm sorry but this just screams sketchy at me -_-;

Lets take our buddies over at Exxon; you know they'll have a big allotment of how much they can spew. They could do a few things quick and easy to lower what they're putting out; swap out the current company cars for hybrids, retrofit for green energy, or if they want something done on the spot they'll just close up some shops and put some people out of work. Which do you think the big co's will do first -_-;

They can half ass it enough to give them some extra spew to sell off to some other company in yet another way these huge cos can make some sick profit.

I'm an environmentalist but I'm also a skeptic and a realist. I don't think we should do anything that would allow the big co's to make money off of pollution. Its more of the same give it to the top one percent and hope trickle down effect works out. It doesn't work out. Look around -_-;

The tax them for what they spew is environmentally the only way to go. The problem is Exxon/Walmart/GM is going to want to pass that cost on to the consumer, us. More or less if we want a decent future for our kids and their kids we better pay up. They'll begrudgingly admit the weather is getting kind of funky while they fund junk science. They appeal to the worst in people; hey you don't have to worry about it let the next gen figure it all out. People will be smarter in 20 years and figure out some cool solution. No. This is not The Jetsons. I do not drive a flying fucking car. We have to fight over Jesus rode a dinosaur being taught in public schools. WTF get real. Fantasy land delusion time needs to come to an end now; for a lot of people it has. I call it coming out of the Bush coma. We have a lot of work to do and we're just getting started. A messiah environmental device in 20 years, don't count on it. The real messiah is all of us right now doing mutherfucking something to stop shit from being really bad 20 years from now. We are shaping the future. Pollution, over fishing, deforestation all happening right now. We're seeing some of the effects but it will be fires, drought, high storm serge, floods, severe storms w/ lightning, lateral winds and tornadoes. Glaciers are a water source for many, what will they do when their gone? Food and clean water scarcity, property damage from acts of nature, climate refugees... that just don't sound so good to me. I don't think some super solution will pop up in 20 years to fix it either.

We have to tax these trashers of the planet but we have to figure out how to do it in a way that "Joe Sixpack" doesn't feel in his wallet. They are already making huge profits off of us and sorry but atm the country is experiencing some financial difficulty and we don't have anymore to hand out; go hit up AIG for a loan bastards.

This is one of those things that make me :angrybash: I just don't have a solution and it drives me crazy. Times like this law school would come in pretty handy -_-;


                                               Look at the flowers

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...