The Political History of Cap-and-Trade
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:54 am
A history of Cap-and-Trade as written by the Smithsonian Magazine. I find it to be a very even-handed account (not really very political).
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/specialse ... c=y&page=1
My three thoughts:
"It's not a win unless it is in the double digets," has to be my favorite line from the article. It encapulates the problem in a nutshell. Politicians want change, but there has to be enough of it to take to the polls.
As Dan often points out, people vote with thier wallets. We know that industry will pass the cost on to us, so most of poor America will not be for spending more. Worse, we can not see the effects of CO2 and so we can not realize the exteral value. And as we proved through the coal peak, (and the gas peak of just a few years ago) consumption will continue to rise, even if the price rises. How much does price need to rise before we make a switch to another energy source (say like we did when we moved from coal to oil)? I'm sure the bioalgea-deisel guys want to know.
I think it is important to relize what is in the air we breath. An Industry's rights should end the moment their pollution they create effects me (infringes on my right to breath clean air). As people became knowledgable about the danger of lead and sulfer, laws were passed to limit them. Carbon emmision regulation will not take effect until we better understand the issue. As this topic is so polerized, I don't forsee any real resolution for at least 4 more years. I see it as something a lame duck Obama might tackle.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/specialse ... c=y&page=1
My three thoughts:
"It's not a win unless it is in the double digets," has to be my favorite line from the article. It encapulates the problem in a nutshell. Politicians want change, but there has to be enough of it to take to the polls.
As Dan often points out, people vote with thier wallets. We know that industry will pass the cost on to us, so most of poor America will not be for spending more. Worse, we can not see the effects of CO2 and so we can not realize the exteral value. And as we proved through the coal peak, (and the gas peak of just a few years ago) consumption will continue to rise, even if the price rises. How much does price need to rise before we make a switch to another energy source (say like we did when we moved from coal to oil)? I'm sure the bioalgea-deisel guys want to know.
I think it is important to relize what is in the air we breath. An Industry's rights should end the moment their pollution they create effects me (infringes on my right to breath clean air). As people became knowledgable about the danger of lead and sulfer, laws were passed to limit them. Carbon emmision regulation will not take effect until we better understand the issue. As this topic is so polerized, I don't forsee any real resolution for at least 4 more years. I see it as something a lame duck Obama might tackle.