‘Cap and Trade’ climate initiative could backfire in the short term
Published: June 21, 2009
One of the programs being shepherded through Congress is the “Cap and Trade” initiative, which has as its objective a 17 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.
This is an initiative by the supporters of the climate change theorists as a way to reduce the release of greenhouse gases, which are thought to contribute to a rise in worldwide temperatures. (That rise is being debated by experts on both sides of the issue).
The gases stated to be the culprits are (in order of potential contribution): carbon dioxide, chloroform, methane (think flatulence of cows as a contributor), nitrous oxide; perflouro-carbons and sulphur hexafloride.
This ranking has been established by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a scientific body to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change, according to Natsource Inc.
If the Cap and Trade proposal is enacted as proponents envision it, power plants, oil refineries and manufacturers (among others) would be required to obtain allowances for the pollution they emit. Those requiring less than their allowance would be free to sell (trade) their excess allowances to those requiring more through the establishment of a “market” on Wall Street. (Now isn’t that something we really need with the current problems existing there?)
The “cap,” under this proposal, sets a firm and permanent limit on the amount of pollutants an operation may emit. One of the problems is that at the present time there are no established limits for these operations and the proposal is suggesting a future date for establishing those limits.
The “rub” thus becomes an opportunity for these operations to increase their pollutant emissions at the present time so that their future starting position is higher and thus easier to attain — and coincidentally provides an opportunity to “trade” (sell) their excess allowances. This could result in a net short-term spike in emitted pollution, whether the proposal is enacted or not.
By way of background, this “Cap and Trade” proposal probably found its genesis in the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, which resulted from a series of reports within the United Nations addressing the question of global warming. It is my understanding that this protocol has yet to be presented to the United States Senate for ratification, which may be a moot question, as the protocol is to expire. A replacement
has been under discussion, but China and the United States are doing a “you go first” dance on agreeing to it.
The Cap and Trade proposal undoubtedly has a long and arduous journey in Congress before it sees the light of day (if ever), as the many parochial interests will have to be heard and backers of many existing programs that may be effected detrimentally will have to be appeased.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the government would raise $973 billion in “Cap” sales between 2010 and 2019 and would expend $821 billion on the program in that same period. Keep in mind that government estimates of income are usually high and expenditures low.
One point on which all seem to agree is that higher energy costs will result and a rebate program will be necessary for low-income households to offset that cost. Guess we can add that to the proposal to provide cash rebates to those who trade in their energy-inefficient cars and trucks for newer, more-efficient vehicles.
And last but not least, “we the people” might wish to voice our interest as the Heritage Foundation has prepared a study that says that the Cap and Trade program has the potential to cost a family $4,300 annually in a few years.
Bayne’s column runs every Sunday on the editorial page.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
AntonioSosa thank you for your intellegent post! Well done!
Cap and Trade will help Obama and his accomplices further empower and enrich themselves at great expense for us and our children and grandchildren.
As per a leaked memo from the Obama administration, cap and trade would reduce household income by more than $7,000 each and every year.
http://www.heartland.org/publications/environment climate/article/25508/Economic_Studies_Support_Leaked_Memo.html
Obama’s ACES Act (cap and trade), however, will cost us much, much more than $7,000 per household! It will cost many of us our businesses. It will cost many of us our jobs. It will cost all of us our freedoms and our future.
Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” said 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.
Cap and trade represents huge taxes and cost increases, which will hurt mostly the poor and the middle class. Cap and trade will give dictatorial powers to Obama and will further enrich his billionaire friends (Gore, Soros, Goldman Sachs, Obama’s Chicago Climate Exchange friends, GE, the United Nations, etc.)—all at our expense and at the expense of our children and grandchildren.
Those brainwashed to the point of wanting to destroy the economy to “prevent global warming” are behaving like the most primitive human beings who were duped into believing that human sacrifices would ensure them good weather. Human beings don’t have the power to control climate! And killing the economy will not help the environment. Poor countries can’t protect the environment. Just look at Haiti!
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
We pray that honest leaders – both Democrat and Republican - are able to save us from Obama’s criminal ACES Act (cap-and-trade) scam.
Advertisement