CAP AND TRADE - Coming to your state soon?

[gslack]

gslack, a reasonably effective pollutant exchange affected revenue and investment in pollutant control resulting in the measurable decrease in pollution.

such an exchange is, in my opinion, a superior solution to regulation or taxation alone. while polluters will pollute through a tax measure by way of your "greed serves no master", they are more likely to adopt policies or implement technologies to mitigate pollution given the opportunity to profit from their competitor's inaction on the same.

the idea extends beyond emplacing an exchange stateside to ensnaring participants from more emissive countries. china is our focus, no doubt, as we were the focus of europe and their kyoto cap and trade.

Good points... I do not agree completely but simply because the way the entire thing is set up by the same people pushing the theory itself. If a system were set up which would make them push to be rid of fossil fuel use, and keep speculators, government officials with an inside track, and various other self serving interests out, i would consider it.

But sadly this is not the case and further, I do not see how it could happen today.. The fact is most big oil and coal has already bought into this system. They and the others who got in at the first stages will be basis of this structure. They represent both the biggest money and the largest users of the credits themselves.

If say exxon decides to import less or refine less they will have a bit of spare CO2 emissions to trade. At this same time the lowered amount of oil or gas produced by one of the largest producers on the planet, will force the supply and demand standard of raising the price of oil or gas. So when they do go back to peak efficiency they have a surplus ready to flood the market with. Now those spare CO2 emissions they had? Well they could have traded them on the market for cash or through smart trading could have gotten even more credits from them as supply was decreased, carbon credits on the market would also increase. And again would drop in value. now they have carbon credits to allow them to pump out as much gas and oil as they need to before the prime rate drops again from the flooding of the market.

So say that took place over a year... In that year did they actually decrease emissions or did they just stagger the emissions to a short and long period? Not only do I believe they could have done that, but I also contend they could quite feasibly end up dumping more CO2 into the atmosphere because of careful manipulation of supply of the product (oil), and the market related to effects of that product (cap and trade)...

There is no safe way to regulate a market reliant on the very thing its designed to combat... its just not logical nor is it reasonable to assume so in my opinion...

i understand that oil wants to be taxed flatly. this administration has a talent for coming through with what lobbies request, be it insurers, unions automakers or banx. maybe that will be the ticket with oil in the bill. refining isnt that carbon intensive. i am with my fleet of v8s from the 80s and 90s. my gas f700 burns fuel where refineries distill it, generally.

the carbon from consumers isn't captured for the exchange. it could evade the point even more than you've considered.

i am thinking that if this mechanism is meant to cap and trade pollution, a subjective, but definitive points system could weigh the curve between clean businesses and leading polluters in all respects. respects that include fox's heavy metals, a concern of mine as an offshore angler, sure, CO2, whatever amounts to an environmental threat. then, these points could be traded round.

a bar is still set for illegal dumping and all. illegal would still be illegal, but the consequential pollution from our produce will be moderated by a market-based system.

Even though I do not share your optimism on this whole thing, it is moot because the system has already been chosen. This debate over the coming bill will not be about the methods or manner they plan to implement or use the cap and trade. That has already been set. It follows the system set in place already in various other countries around the world.

Believe me this will be about CO2 and only CO2, or as they call it "carbon", which again is very dubious. later when or if it turns out CO2 is not the problem, they will do the same thing they did when it began to cool instead of warm. it was climate change and BAM! all was new again. The way and means are already set, the biggest core investors with the market setup money are already locked in, offset companies already set up, and all pieces are waiting now. All one need do is take a look at the CCX website and see their list of partners, and investors already.... Make no mistake this is set already.

I am not some kind of conspiracy nut, and I am not an idiot... I have been working in, with and for the government for 21 years. There is no way they will be able nor will they even want to try and make it harder for those in on this to emit CO2. Oil is big money and required for this economy to run, both directly and indirectly. This is not about limiting them, but about curtailing people from developing to another United States...

Carbon credits will allow another way to manipulate oil prices. THis will effect price at the pump. You seem to think it leaves us consumers out for some reason... No I am afraid not. First we will pay more at the pump to cover the losses thats not a belief thats a fact we already do this now... it happens in anything when there is new costs and fees added to a product, the price difference shows in the quantity per or price per unit.

Later we will pay more directly... Why? Because as you just said those things effected right now are not as carbon intensive compared to automobiles and transportation. After a couple years and we get numb to this new cost, we will be rocked with a new discovery that their estimates were wrong and we need to limit CO2 emissions more directly now. And of course many of us will stand up and proclaim its the least we can do for our planet. Then we will get taxed on our own individual CO2 output or "carbon footprint"... And from there it will get uglier.....

You can think I am reading too much into this if you want, but if you look at history you cannot deny there is in the very least some real reason for doubt....

A cap and trade and the taxation on CO2 that comes with is a tax on life make no mistake about it....

 

[SpidermanTuba]

. He's a pandering huckster looking to scam the world

What for? He made his millions already on google.

You still have to prove your case once.

I'm not a lawyer and this isn't a court of law but I suppose that doesn't really matter much to you.

 

[gslack]

. He's a pandering huckster looking to scam the world

What for? He made his millions already on google.

You still have to prove your case once.

I'm not a lawyer and this isn't a court of law but I suppose that doesn't really matter much to you.

show your maturity asshole..... Tell us more about your PHD candidacy genius....

 

[skookerasbil]

Close to the same, harder to enforce. The suphate emissions usually settled within a few hundred miles of the source, the CO2 affects all the world.

The reason that I do not think they will be effective is that the effects we are seeing right now from AGW were predicted to happen 20 to 100 years from now. If this continues, only an outright, and rapidly declining cap will do any good, and only decades in the future. From past observation, there is about 30 years or more heating from the present GHGs in the atmosphere. There is that much inertia in the system.

Irrelevant.

Nobody wants to have their electric bill double. End of story. All the rest is nothing but k00k OCD bantor.

 

[skookerasbil]

Just a commentary about the whole energy debate and as it relates to the oil spill and energy for our nation moving forward.......

shit happens in a post industrial revolution age. You deal with it and move on like anything else in life. Failure rate of oil rigs is miniscule..............

You'll find that people who think differently on this energy subject frequently exist in a very makey-uppey world. Many of the people who post on these boards.............those who cannot accept that life in the 21st century has its tradeoffs..............are people who dont have the typical responsibilities of the average American who are forced to weed out priorities in life. ALmost invariably, the k00k liberals on this board never have to do that. All you have to do is look at the total post count of many of the k00ks on this board. 9,000.........10,000...........12,000 posts in about a year. There is a level of naive in terms of assessing priorities when you can spend 12, 14 or 16 hours a day sitting at a computer philosophizing about how our world should be. Its akin to putting a McDonalds employee in a seat at an air traffic control tower and saying, "Here.........have at it s0n............and good luck!!!". Its "absurd" defined!!! Unless you are part of this Life of Reilly crowd, you cant take goofballs like Old Rocks seriously


Most conservatives have real lives, thus are forced to make real decisions based upon what is truly a priority in life. To stop and weigh what is the ideal in any situation whould be a prescription for lots and lots of people to be blowing their brains out. Most of the k00ks on this board cant comprehend that because its not part of their dynamic in life...............they have all the time in the world to be as fcukking idealistic as possible ( again.......take a gandor at their total posts counts for the sobering reality). Any wonder why I refer to them as mental cases???

Life is about assessing necessary tradeoffs.........we live in an idustrial age. Coal and oil will be the method of ensuring that our economy moves forward and it will continue to be that way for decades and decades................its that simple, and no idealistic notion of the Land of Oz is going to change it. I'll be many years in the box before its significantly different. Perhaps in 30 or 40 years, the technology will be affordable enough to consider making it feasible to make decisions based upon a hail mary pass guess about the future. Not now.............and thats just the way it is.


Its simple pragmatism at its core, really. Some people simply cant fathom that........but again, these are people who can afford to exist in this perpetual state of seeking to embrace the ideal at every turn ( make transportation all electric.........put a windmill on every roof etc............). Because the k00k never weighs the tradeoffs.

Conservatives understand that you cant fullfill every desire in your life that you want and are constantly weighing cost-benefit ratio's.............becasue they do it every day of their lives.

 

[Foxfyre]

Close to the same, harder to enforce. The suphate emissions usually settled within a few hundred miles of the source, the CO2 affects all the world.

The reason that I do not think they will be effective is that the effects we are seeing right now from AGW were predicted to happen 20 to 100 years from now. If this continues, only an outright, and rapidly declining cap will do any good, and only decades in the future. From past observation, there is about 30 years or more heating from the present GHGs in the atmosphere. There is that much inertia in the system.

Irrelevant.

Nobody wants to have their electric bill double. End of story. All the rest is nothing but k00k OCD bantor.

You're right. Nobody wants to pay a lot more for electricity plus a lot of other things, much less double or triple.

But most of us would suck it up and deal with that if we were convinced it was absolutely necessary.

It is a bitter pill to swallow, however, when you don't believe it is necessary and in fact is a plan to enrich some and increase power and authority for others. When you look at the whole picture, it is very difficult to come to any other intelligent conclusion.

 

[Big Fitz]

. He's a pandering huckster looking to scam the world

What for? He made his millions already on google.

You still have to prove your case once.

I'm not a lawyer and this isn't a court of law but I suppose that doesn't really matter much to you.

no really.



Okay, I guess you're just the perfect example that a college education (if you're to be believed) can't cure stupidity and determined naivete. But having gone to college, I knew that already, just nice to have an object lesson every so often that some of the goddamn stupidest people in the world have doctorates. Not all, but too many.

 

[Foxfyre]

. He's a pandering huckster looking to scam the world

What for? He made his millions already on google.

You still have to prove your case once.

I'm not a lawyer and this isn't a court of law but I suppose that doesn't really matter much to you.

no really.



Okay, I guess you're just the perfect example that a college education (if you're to be believed) can't cure stupidity and determined naivete. But having gone to college, I knew that already, just nice to have an object lesson every so often that some of the goddamn stupidest people in the world have doctorates. Not all, but too many.

Are we still talking Al Gore here? PhD? I don't think so. I think he did graduate with with honors from Harvard but a bachelors degree is all that he earned. He subsequently dropped out of Divinity School, Law School, and Journalism School and never achieved a graduate degree. His science education is limited to whatever basics Harvard required for a bachelors degree and I think one class related to environment.

Speaking of Gore, however, he still has his high energy consuming 10,000 sq ft house in Tennessee, but has recently acquired this $9 million shack in California where he now resides. How energy efficient do you suppose it is?

Really brings a tear to your eye at the sacrifice he is making to save the planet while he asks the rest of us to suck it in and conserve energy like mad.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

. He's a pandering huckster looking to scam the world

What for? He made his millions already on google.

You still have to prove your case once.

I'm not a lawyer and this isn't a court of law but I suppose that doesn't really matter much to you.

no really.



Okay, I guess you're just the perfect example that a college education (if you're to be believed) can't cure stupidity and determined naivete. But having gone to college, I knew that already, just nice to have an object lesson every so often that some of the goddamn stupidest people in the world have doctorates. Not all, but too many.

And... ?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Really brings a tear to your eye at the sacrifice he is making to save the planet while he asks the rest of us to suck it in and conserve energy like mad.

Why are you so pissed that this one particular rich person can afford more than you? yes, when carbon credits are put in place, there will be a price on carbon. The rich will be able to afford to buy more carbon, just like they can buy more food, cars, golf courses, and yachts.

Do you not wish to reward personal free market success?

 

[gslack]

Really brings a tear to your eye at the sacrifice he is making to save the planet while he asks the rest of us to suck it in and conserve energy like mad.

Why are you so pissed that this one particular rich person can afford more than you? yes, when carbon credits are put in place, there will be a price on carbon. The rich will be able to afford to buy more carbon, just like they can buy more food, cars, golf courses, and yachts.

Do you not wish to reward personal free market success?

Stop being a little twerp... No one is upset he can afford more. The problem is he tells everyone else to conserve..... Junior your ignorant bullshit is getting old...

 

[Foxfyre]

Really brings a tear to your eye at the sacrifice he is making to save the planet while he asks the rest of us to suck it in and conserve energy like mad.

Why are you so pissed that this one particular rich person can afford more than you? yes, when carbon credits are put in place, there will be a price on carbon. The rich will be able to afford to buy more carbon, just like they can buy more food, cars, golf courses, and yachts.

Do you not wish to reward personal free market success?

I am all for free market success, but have a difficult time believing anybody who has made all the money Al Gore has made, in the way he has made it, is nothing more than a huge hypocrite and scam artist.

 

[westwall]

Hello Foxfyre,

While heavy metal pollution is a concern on a local scene, if they are dumped far enough out they truly are not a concern. They stay local to the area they were dumped. However if they are dumped close to shore then certainly there are major concerns. My particular area of concern is the rainforest destruction that is occuring. This is something that we could do something about but either choose not to or don't have the resources for. The problem with the rainforest destruction is that once the area has been clear cut it will not comeback till there is a major geologic change, so for all intents it will be permanent.

environment is now a concern of the past by way of the spotlight turning to a concern with less anthropological and biological consequence than it bears financial reward.

what about toxins and pollutants? these issues have taken the back seat to what i know to be non-toxic affectors on the environment.

This is absolutely right.

My primary environmental concern right now is the heavy metals that are being dumped in the ocean - mercury et al. Such has extremely long term implications and seems to be entirely off the radar screen as a concern right now.

If our government was addressing that and putting pressure on the International community to follow suit, they could accomplish something truly wonderful for humankind and I think every one of us skeptics would be on board.

 

[westwall]

Because he has stolen it from us the people who actually have to work at making a living. He on the other hand because of his political connections is abusing the free market to take from us. He doesn't give a rats ass about the poor and disaffected he only wants to screw them more. And you are so ignorant that you want him to do it. This guy has no real knowledge of the environment at all. In fact he got lost on his own property and had to be found by the Secret Service. The man is an imbecile and you worship him. Good job!

Really brings a tear to your eye at the sacrifice he is making to save the planet while he asks the rest of us to suck it in and conserve energy like mad.

Why are you so pissed that this one particular rich person can afford more than you? yes, when carbon credits are put in place, there will be a price on carbon. The rich will be able to afford to buy more carbon, just like they can buy more food, cars, golf courses, and yachts.

Do you not wish to reward personal free market success?

 

[antagon]

Hello Foxfyre,

While heavy metal pollution is a concern on a local scene, if they are dumped far enough out they truly are not a concern. They stay local to the area they were dumped. However if they are dumped close to shore then certainly there are major concerns. My particular area of concern is the rainforest destruction that is occuring. This is something that we could do something about but either choose not to or don't have the resources for. The problem with the rainforest destruction is that once the area has been clear cut it will not comeback till there is a major geologic change, so for all intents it will be permanent.

environment is now a concern of the past by way of the spotlight turning to a concern with less anthropological and biological consequence than it bears financial reward.

what about toxins and pollutants? these issues have taken the back seat to what i know to be non-toxic affectors on the environment.

This is absolutely right.

My primary environmental concern right now is the heavy metals that are being dumped in the ocean - mercury et al. Such has extremely long term implications and seems to be entirely off the radar screen as a concern right now.

If our government was addressing that and putting pressure on the International community to follow suit, they could accomplish something truly wonderful for humankind and I think every one of us skeptics would be on board.

that is shockingly presumptuous about heavy metals, man, and about the connection between inshore and offshore ecosystems. ideally, heavy metals should not be put in solution with any body of water. better on land, i say. better below the water table or something, where heavy metals came from in the first place.

on the rainforest, that is just another facet of environmental concerns which for the political appeal has been narrowed to a single element on the chart. but similarly, the save the rainforest crowd has impinged on savanna adjoining the amazon with reforestation projects which impact other ecosystems. i guess the lesson is to tread lightly with both environmental impact, and remedy.

 

[Foxfyre]

Hello Foxfyre,

While heavy metal pollution is a concern on a local scene, if they are dumped far enough out they truly are not a concern. They stay local to the area they were dumped. However if they are dumped close to shore then certainly there are major concerns. My particular area of concern is the rainforest destruction that is occuring. This is something that we could do something about but either choose not to or don't have the resources for. The problem with the rainforest destruction is that once the area has been clear cut it will not comeback till there is a major geologic change, so for all intents it will be permanent.

environment is now a concern of the past by way of the spotlight turning to a concern with less anthropological and biological consequence than it bears financial reward.

what about toxins and pollutants? these issues have taken the back seat to what i know to be non-toxic affectors on the environment.

This is absolutely right.

My primary environmental concern right now is the heavy metals that are being dumped in the ocean - mercury et al. Such has extremely long term implications and seems to be entirely off the radar screen as a concern right now.

If our government was addressing that and putting pressure on the International community to follow suit, they could accomplish something truly wonderful for humankind and I think every one of us skeptics would be on board.

But who bothers to haul them out to the middle of the ocean? Nuclear waste and all kinds of other toxins stay put when you dump it, too, but the total effect is accumulative. I would like to be able to eat all the fish I want without worrying about mercury poisoning etc. again. And clean up of toxic dumps in the ocean is not easily accomplished either.

I agree that care and conservation should be taken re the rain forests too, but it is not true that rain forests don't regenerate themselves. Studies done show that a cleared tract will usually reforest itself within 65 years if left alone; more quickly if given a bit of help (reseeding etc.) To return to completely virgin condition of course takes a lot longer but that is not a huge problem. Of course we want to retain virgin rain forest, but always there must be consideration for human needs too. There are very few virgin forests left in the USA, for instance, but we have plenty of forest land.

I still say that prosperity along with a good ethical sense of right and wrong is the very best protection for the Earth's environment.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Really brings a tear to your eye at the sacrifice he is making to save the planet while he asks the rest of us to suck it in and conserve energy like mad.

Why are you so pissed that this one particular rich person can afford more than you? yes, when carbon credits are put in place, there will be a price on carbon. The rich will be able to afford to buy more carbon, just like they can buy more food, cars, golf courses, and yachts.

Do you not wish to reward personal free market success?

I am all for free market success, but have a difficult time believing anybody who has made all the money Al Gore has made, in the way he has made it, is nothing more than a huge hypocrite and scam artist.

Why are you obsessed with Al Gore?

 

[antagon]

But who bothers to haul them out to the middle of the ocean? Nuclear waste and all kinds of other toxins stay put when you dump it, too, but the total effect is accumulative. I would like to be able to eat all the fish I want without worrying about mercury poisoning etc. again. And clean up of toxic dumps in the ocean is not easily accomplished either.

I agree that care and conservation should be taken re the rain forests too, but it is not true that rain forests don't regenerate themselves. Studies done show that a cleared tract will usually reforest itself within 65 years if left alone; more quickly if given a bit of help (reseeding etc.) To return to completely virgin condition of course takes a lot longer but that is not a huge problem. Of course we want to retain virgin rain forest, but always there must be consideration for human needs too. There are very few virgin forests left in the USA, for instance, but we have plenty of forest land.

I still say that prosperity along with a good ethical sense of right and wrong is the very best protection for the Earth's environment.

i fish tuna. it wont matter how far offshore toxins are dumped. the ocean is not the place.


call me a patriotic, but one of the biggest nags about the global warming debate, is that it has been fashioned to demonize US environmental policy. I think that it takes more than trusting people's good ethics to protect the environment. we might have westwall dumping his sluice juice offshore under uninformed presumptions of harmlessness.

what we have in the US is this balance between environment and society, which europe, for example, simply does not believe in. onus for environmental care lies more heavily on our businesses. it is the american way. we will mandate that all shopping bags at the grocery are biodegradable. in europe, they'll charge you for bags at the checkout. we'll adopt higher emissions standards, in europe, they'll levy a congestion charge in the name of the environment, then interpret diesels to be less emmissive.

what is certain is that the government has to set and enforce standards for the environment, so that companies can focus on being ethical to their clients, and complicit to laws which inform and direct their environmental policy. companies cant and wont take that upon themselves.

 

[Foxfyre]

Why are you so pissed that this one particular rich person can afford more than you? yes, when carbon credits are put in place, there will be a price on carbon. The rich will be able to afford to buy more carbon, just like they can buy more food, cars, golf courses, and yachts.

Do you not wish to reward personal free market success?

I am all for free market success, but have a difficult time believing anybody who has made all the money Al Gore has made, in the way he has made it, is nothing more than a huge hypocrite and scam artist.

Why are you obsessed with Al Gore?

Oh I don't know. I actually thought he was your cup of tea. You never know about people though do you?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I am all for free market success, but have a difficult time believing anybody who has made all the money Al Gore has made, in the way he has made it, is nothing more than a huge hypocrite and scam artist.

Why are you obsessed with Al Gore?

Oh I don't know. I actually thought he was your cup of tea. You never know about people though do you?

I actually don't give a shit about al gore, its deniers like you that constantly bring him up as if it matters.