By Alan Durning
A novel argument.
Paul Krugman weighs in with an argument for auctioned cap and trade ASAP: legal emissions limits can be a macroeconomic stimulus.
This piece originally appeared in Sightline Institute's blog, The Daily Score.
We don't need ANY more taxes! Taxes are already killing our companies and destroying our future! Cap and Trade "would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy, all without any scientific justification," says famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence.
More and more scientists and thinking people all over the world are realizing that man-made global warming is a hoax that threatens our future and the future of our children. More than 700 international scientists dissent over man-made global warming claims. They are now more than 13 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers. http://www.climatechangefraud.com/content/view/3562/218/
Additionally, more than 30,000 American scientists have signed onto a petition that states, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." http://www.petitionproject.org
"Progressive" (communist) politicians like Obama seem determined to force us to swallow the man-made global warming scam. We need to defend ourselves from the United Nations and these politicians, who threaten our future and the future of our children. Based on a lie, they have already wasted billions and plan to increase taxes and increase the cost of energy, which will limit development, destroy our economy and enslave us.
If not stopped, the global warming scam will enrich the scammers (Gore and Obama's Wall Street friends), increase the power of the United Nations and communists like Obama, and multiply poverty and servitude for the rest of us.
Sigh, the anti-science syndrome suffering deniers come out everywhere, don't they.
Antonio -- your words are, at best, misdirection via truthiness.
In any event, Krugman's piece is spot on.
The SO2 emmission off-set program stopped all the acid rain problems that I learned about in grade school in the 80's - at least I haven't heard anythign about it since and as near as I can tell the Statue of Liberty is still standing as well as all of the other statues that I learned would be crumbling by now if we didn't solve the acid rain problem. Why can't another government program solve the global warming problem?
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) has now run three auctions on carbon. The cost varies between $3 and $4 per ton and the last auction brought in about $173 million for the ten Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states participating in the program. Electricity costs rose about 1%.
At least, that's what I remember from a recent presentation by Commissioner Philip Giudice of the MA Dept of Energy Resources (DOER).
"Sigh, the anti-science syndrome suffering deniers come out everywhere, don't they."
AntonioSosa's a particularly tedious denier troll too, popping up all over the place at the moment. I think that he doesn't actually exist and that in fact he is a denybot:
What about cap-and-dividend? It seems to be the win-win system we need.
The Concept of CO2 Cap and Trade is Absurd
The real reason Cap & Trade is being foisted on the world is it creates a 3 trillion dollar commodity market for you guessed it: hot air. Finally politicians have found a way to put a price on their most abundant resource! And for politicians there is no downside as nothing has to be actually produced.
The real beneficiaries are the rich special interest who will get wealthier setting up and trading in this new commodities market. But citizens will pay more taxes to operate new regulatory bureaucracies and more for goods as business passes the cost along.
And all this is based on the premise that operating automobiles is resulting in global warming. Question: did Fred Flintstones truck fleet cause the last period of global warming or is global warming a cyclical event that is more affected by sun spot cycles. The Earth has had multiple tropical and glacial ages over the millennia. The most recent news is that the oceans of the world will be cooling for the next 25-30 years.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that the most prevalent hot house gas is water vapor. Should citizens of earth try to stop the rain cycle?
And if we are going to implement Cap and Trade who will decide what the optimal CO2 carrying capacity of Earth is?
And there are questions about how to implement financial controls and reliably audit such a system. Will every person and business on the planet be issued C02 permits? Is the permit an asset a business can liquidate when it goes out of business? If a business in California goes out of business and sells its CO2 permit to a company in England, will a new company in California have to find another seller to open his business and replace lost jobs? After all, if there is an optimal CO2 carrying capacity then an increasing population of people and businesses means a lower standard of living and reduced CO2 allotment for each new person or business.
Upon their death can Mom and Dad leave their CO2 permits to their children? Should Mom and Dad be limited to having two children?
What about the countries that do not subscribe to Cap & Trade. Will multi-national companies export new construction and jobs to 3rd world non-subscribing countries? And the flipside, will the people of the Amazon miss out on new opportunities because an American company bought 1000s of acres to be left unused to acquire carbon sequestration credits.