- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
The Environmental Spectator
Cap and Pollute
The House passage of the American Clean Energy and Security Act Friday was billed as a narrow victory for President Obama and the green lobby. But was it a victory for real environmentalism?
Sadly, no. The legislation's many loopholes that had to be added to secure its passage will make it far less effective -- to be charitable. The "cap and trade" regime that the bill would create promises to ratchet down carbon emissions over time but creates a dangerous precedent for the environment.
Cap and trade essentially creates a property right out of polluting. Once Company A has an emissions permit, it can release a certain amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Or it can sell its permit rights to Company Z.
The bright idea is to create an incentive to decrease carbon emissions so that a company can profit off its excessive permits. In reality, what it does is create an enforceable right to pollute.
In the past, pollution was seen as a sort of "necessary evil" that could be regulated or rescinded if necessary. Now companies will have a right to pollute because they were already in the polluting business and were grandfathered in, or because they paid good money for that right.
Cap and trade guarantees the right to pollute over a certain, fixed amount of time. The bill ratchets down the amount of carbon emissions allowed over time by a schedule. That sounds like a win for environmentalism. However, the percentages and dates create expectations that go along with these permits being sold.
Companies will purchase permits from each other with the expectation that they will be able to emit a specific amount of carbon over a specific time period. These percentages and dates are political goals and are not based on solid scientific research.
That could lead to unexpectedly bad results. For example, the amount of carbon emissions allowed could turn out to be incredibly dangerous to the public. Under a cap and trade regime, if the government attempts to "fix" the problem the action would amount to a "taking." Lawyers would then tie it up in court for years.
And the "cap" part of cap and trade is hardly set in stone. The bill allows companies to offset their carbon emissions beyond their permitted use by "helping the environment" in some other politically favored way.
For example, if a company pays to preserve an acre of rain forest, it secures the right to release more carbon emissions. That might superficially seem to maintain the balance between carbon producers and carbon reducers, but that balance is a convenient myth.
Forget for a moment that the generous offsets allowed by the bill were crafted in response to industry prodding. There is no hard evidence that carbon offsets actually work.
And, remember, the environment is far bigger than the United States. Companies can often go elsewhere. Congress has to take into consideration that pushing companies out of the United States into other, less regulated areas, would have the opposite effect of the bill's intention.
Politicians need to realize there is a difference between doing "something" to help combat global warming and doing "anything" on that front.
It's unwise to ram a 1,500-page bill through the House in the dead of the night -- with a last minute 300-page amendment tacked on to buy needed votes -- and expect that to work.
All it amounts to now is a "feel good" bill with no realistic environmental benefits at a huge cost to individuals.
Comments
Leave a Comment
Big J| 7.2.09 @ 7:11AM
This bill isn't about saving the planet. It is about money, power and control.
A lot of people stand to make a lot of money trading and selling these imaginary "carbon offsets" and credits.
It's just another excuse the left uses such as "do it for the children" or "what about minorities?".
Unfortunately, this 1,500 page excuse of a bill takes a huge step in destroying our economy.
Thank you very much, ignorant voters.
Robert Rosencrans| 7.2.09 @ 7:19AM
One way the Democratic leadership got this evil scheme pushed through was to promise to limit the damage to the agricultural sector. Somehow, the alleged small farmer rules all.
The concept behind the plan of carbon offsets resembles the ethanol plan to a cerain extent where one sector of society is allowed to drain rescources out of another sector by providing a government mandated service or product.
The same promises were made to the agriculture lobby in Australia and only now are they finding out they were lied to by the proponents of this phony plan.
http://www.carbonoffsetsdaily.com/australasia/incomes-cop-carbon-hit-8699.htm
FARMERS could face income hits of up to $11,000 by 2015 as a result of emissions trading, the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics says.
In a new study, ABARE said beef, dairy and crop farmers would take big hits, even if agriculture was not covered by the Federal Government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
But federal Agriculture Minister Tony Burke has immediately rejected the findings of his own research body, saying they take no account of farmer reactions.
The shock ABARE estimates confirm the worst fears of the farm sector about the impact of the Government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
Siegfried X| 7.2.09 @ 9:43AM
When I was growing up all the experts said we would have global COOLING because of pollution.
Grzmlyk| 7.2.09 @ 10:06AM
This article is a classic example of what's wrong with conservative thinking.
Instead of talking about how this bill doesn't really save the planet because it fails to limit carbon, the argument MUST be defeated not by hacking off its extremities, but by decapitating it: Focus on the utter ridculousness of CO2 as a pollutant in the first place.
Global warming (or, in a classic hedge, now it's "climate change") is a canard more blatant than the Wizard of Oz. It is laughable on its face for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that CO2 makes comprises an inconsequential portion of the atmosphere.
We should NOT be talking about this bill's efficacy in the face of China, India and other "polluters." CO2 is NOT a pollutant!!! It's NOT CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING!!! That's the argument these craven Republicans should be mounting - not whining because China and India aren't equally crippled by this terrifying chimera.
We might as well be pouring money into Al Gore's capacious maw because he tells us that he - and only he - has seen a homicidal ogre living in a cave at the antipodes who promises not to kill mankind if we only give Al Gore the world's treasure, which Al PROMISES to selflessly give to the ogre in order to appease him.
Is this the perfect open-ended grift or what? Protection money proferred to a ghost that only a chosen few can see; a monster that must be continually be appeased anew into eternity.
The fact that this unseen ogre's favorite dish is American Dollars just makes the shameless nature of this hoax all the more risible.
Just another example of how America has become a gigantic insane asylum with the inmates in charge.
Pete| 7.2.09 @ 10:14AM
Good rant. All too true. All too depressing. These corrupt idiots are unchecked and going wild. With unlimited funds, courtesy of you and me, they can buy off anyone who opposes their schemes to steal even more taxpayer money. I keep saying, this can't and won't end well.
Kevin| 7.2.09 @ 10:30AM
I have to agree with Grzmlyk. Until conservatives make it clear that the SCIENCE "justification" for this rape is bogus, they will be nipping at the margins. Too many pay lip service to the "yes climate change is real, and it is important, but . . .". BALONEY. It's a sham. The Obama administration commitment to "science" is a sham. The voters would understand this (they suspect it already) if the conservative leadership would just clearly speak the truth!
nicole| 7.2.09 @ 10:41AM
It's not about the environment, it's about money. In the end, that is what everything is about. We will never be able to something productive unless it also has a positive monetary outcome.
Grzmlyk| 7.2.09 @ 10:41AM
Yes, Kevin: It's too bad that it is the Republican WAY to be Democrat Lite:
Yes, government is a huge trough of entitlements, but since we're the fiscally responsbible party, we'll just make the trough slightly smaller;
Yes, we must allow illegal immigrants into this country, but since we're prudent, we'll put a band-aid on the hemorrhage;
Yes, voter fraud is a problem, but we'll slink away when elections are stolen from us;
Yes, climate change is bad, but we can't cripple ourselves TOO much.
Time and again we cede the playing field, the boundaries, the rules and the referreeing to democrats and then wonder why we keep losing.
Here's a way to stop the global warming hogwash: Tax every government employee 80% of their income strictly for global warming, and make every registered Democrat physically take a cash payment of 80% of their income every single pay day to their local congressman's office and physically count out the money in order to receive a receipt for having fulfilled their global warming prevention obligations for that pay period.
Global warming would recede from the public forum with the speed of light.
chuck| 7.2.09 @ 11:27AM
Right on, Grzmlyk! Republicans haven't had any balls since they first took over Congress in '94. Prior to that, Newt was a bomb-thrower, which was exactly what they needed. But then after they took control, they decided being liked by the elites was more important than standing up for the principles that got them elected. I don't blame the Dems for the BS in Washington, it's what they do. I blame the GOP for blowing the chance that they had. They need to grow some balls.
Tony in Central PA| 7.2.09 @ 12:04PM
I found the best and briefest description of whether this bill would actually succeed in its alleged intended purpose of reducing CO2 emissions : " Its like having p_ssing and nonp_issing ends in the same swimming pool ".
Dave Lincoln| 7.2.09 @ 12:37PM
"For example, the amount of carbon emissions allowed could turn out to be incredibly dangerous to the public."
Jeanne Marie, you fancy yourself a chemist, do you? Carbon Dioxide and Water are the two products of the combustion reaction. There are also by-products many times, some of them bad for us to breath and some not. But CO2 and H2O are as natural as air itself. Any time anything burns, that's what you get. Next thing, you'll be talking about Nitrogen emissions*.
The words "pollutant" and "emissions" have become words that go together these days, even though "emissions" could mean lots of things (yeah, go to Wikapedia like everybody else does these days). To write about Carbon (huh?) or Carbon Dioxide "emissions" is to follow the lead of the lefties like the rest of their useful idiots, so as to preclude any talk about whether CO2 is harmful to anyone in any way. We know it's not directly harmful, and the climate modeling needs a TON of work. It is not a pollutant by any definition of that word, OK? I don't see a reason to use those words like a blind idiot.
I would expect more from someone who writes an article appearing in the Spectator. Yes, I have said this before, in regards to some imbecile who wants to combine America with Mexico. Yes, I threatened to quit commenting here. You editors - you are hereby forwarned, again. Don't make me come down there.
Now, I don't take issue with the article's view on the bad economic incentives of the Cap-and-Tax bill. However, you started off totally on the wrong foot when spouting your emissions about any harm from a natural gas that has existed in the atmosphere since before even the AlGore's noxious eruption.
Green is the new Red. Better Lean and Mean than Green (yes, I made that up just now. no, you can't borrow it. Eric Peters can borrow it, if he wants)
Oh, Nitrogen makes up ~79% of the atmosphere, Miss Jeanne Marie Curie ;-)
Dave Lincoln| 7.2.09 @ 12:47PM
"When I was growing up all the experts said we would have global COOLING because of pollution."
Yes, I remember that too, Sigfried. So, we quit polluting big-time, so it shouldn't be cooling,' cept it is. Dang. Nobody informed the coming glaciers about this, yet. I'm not gonna tell them, you tell em.
I guess Moron is the new Expert.
BTW, excellent comments, Mr. Grzmlyk. I didn't read yours before I commented above. I have some hope that people are going to catch on. That's why the lefties are running to terms like "climate change" which is just silly.
The Chinese are just soiling their pants laughing at our stupidity in this country. They've got real problems, but they know a real problem from a hoax.
Big J| 7.2.09 @ 9:54PM
Right on, Grzmlyk.
Dave Lincoln, absolutely brilliant post. I missed it. Major kudos. I really hope you don't quit commenting here.
Manuel Hermosillo| 7.3.09 @ 12:15PM
Yes, Big J,
Welcome to the new record setting scam. Maddoff is the flea and Gore is the camel.
Please take a little time to review the resumees of the staff at Gore´s Generation Management Investment...
Mostly financial speculators and lawyers... zero scientific or sound environmentalists.
Marc Jeric| 7.3.09 @ 4:17PM
1) There was first in the 1970's the globaloney cooling scam (see e.g. Newsweek April 28 1975 on the internet); the government-paid scientists (90% of them are rejects of private enterprise) recommended to fight the new ice age by sending our war planes to cover the polar ice with soot in order to increase solar heat and prevent crushing of New York skyscrapers by the new glaciers;
2) When that did not work we had the globaloney warming hoax in the 1990's, proclaimed by mainly the same government-paid scientists (Dr. Hansen of the NOAA, for example); to prevent the massive heating, fires, flooding of coastal cities, disappearance of Florida, California, and Caribbean islands, massive hurricanes, global famine, and other catastrophic events we should nationalize oil and gas and coal and electricity companies;
3) after 11 years of considerable cooling we are now faced with the climate change flimflam where whatever happens with our climate we should nationalize oil and gas and coal and electricity companies; and why not our banks, car companies while we are at it. To prevent this catastrophe the best vehicle presumably is international agreements enforced by the United Nations world government.
As for the influence of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas: on a normal day the atmoshere contains 10,000 ppm (parts per million) of water vapor and about 300 ppm of carbon dioxide. The government-paid scientists say that an increase of 100 ppm of CO2 over the next 50 years will result in a catastrophic warming. The thermal absorptivity of water vapor is 4 times larger than that of carbon dioxide; it follows that the CO2 increase will increase the overall thermal absorptivity of the mixture by about 1/4 of one percent. The production of methane from livestock and the swamps (or as the enviro-nazis call those "wetlands") vastly surpasses the influence of CO2.
There is the Global Warming Petition Project (see Internet) where 31,478 US independent scientists declared that there is no anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming; of these 9,029 are scientists with PhD degrees. Our enviro-nazis tried to sabotage this effort by submiiting phony names with phoney degrees - and then claimed the whole effort by the Petition scientists was a fraud. It took us 3 years and a lot of private money to verify the credentials of all the signatories and clean up the Petition of those saboteurs. See also Manhattan Declaration with more such signatories, plus a large number of scientific groups from other countries who state the same.
I am one of these signatories, MS and PhD degrees from UCLA, with majors in thermodynamics and heat & mass transfer.
I think to fight this communist attempt to secure a permanent hold on power should not be fought on the narrow grounds of more taxes - that is the losing proposition; where about 50% of the population is on some kind of welfare we will always be outvoted. The battle should be fought and won on the firm scientific basis.
SCAM - HOAX - FLIMFLAM!!!
Thanks Grzmlyk and Kevin for excellent comments!
John II| 7.4.09 @ 12:32PM
Ms. Hoffman's article left me slack-jawed until I was reassured by the posts of Grzmlyk and Kevin--and, of course, Marc's now standard rejoinder, which bears many and many more repetitions.
To argue that cap-and-trade is a bad way to "combat global warming" is roughly equivalent to arguing . . . that liberals are attempting the confiscation of firearms in the wrong way . . . or that abortion services should be more user-friendly . . . or that a different make of bulldozers should be employed in the wholesale application of eminent domain . . . or . . . well, make up your own analogy; I'm getting slack-jawed again.
Al| 7.5.09 @ 1:07AM
It is about the money. Look at all the 501 (c), including some of their for profit spin-off ventures financed with the taxpayer money while these same clowns influencing U.S. policies and finances.
Jerzy Strzelecki| 7.5.09 @ 5:09AM
As Grzmlyk I am higly surprised to see such a treatment of the AGW isuue in a conservative publication.
There is more than enough scientific evidence - Roman and Medieval Warm Periods, Vostok core analysis showing that C02 lags temperature, etc. etc. - to argue that AGW is complete nonsense. A conservative publication in the US should also be acquainted with the Oregon Declaration.
If not American Spectator than who?
Roy| 7.5.09 @ 2:22PM
Re:chuck, who wrote: "I don't blame the Dems for the BS in Washington, it's what they do."
Yeah. Well, you might want to start.
JimE| 7.5.09 @ 6:19PM
Global warming is a scam, carbon credits trading will be handled by Goldman-sachs and Soros earning a nice profit for the obama controllers.
Grzmlyk is correct on how to deal with the problem.
Pingback| 7.6.09 @ 6:50PM
Steynian 371 « Free Canuckistan! links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ed Hardy Swimwear| 7.24.09 @ 3:55AM
i like it
cheap handbags| 7.26.09 @ 6:52PM
We only sell the top grade replica cheap handbags, some of them are genuine leather handbags, yet the price is far lower than the authentic designers want you to pay. We lead you to a genuine pool of bags : collections in wide range: handbags, shoulder bags, clutches, tote bags, purses and wallets, the hottest brands you can find like replica Louis Vuitton handbags, Replica marc jacobs handags, Replica Prada handbags, Coach,Replica Chloe handbags,Burberry, Dior,replica Chanel handbags, Chloe,Replica gucci handbags, Dolce & Gabbana,Replica Balenciaga handbags . Crafted to the highest standard, from the finest materials in the industry, we guarantee the toppest Replica Hermes handbags at low price you'll find anywhere.
george| 7.29.09 @ 3:01AM
Louis Vuitton Damier Geant Canvas bags , commonly referred to as
Louis Vuitton Damier Geant Canvas, or sometimes shortened to
LV Damier Geant Canvas handbag has become one of the most
Louis Vuitton Damier Graphite bags luxury brands.
louis vuitton online storelove
ouis vuitton online shopgood
vuitton onlinei like
louis vuitton shopnice
bjknjk| 8.20.09 @ 2:32AM
Always leading the avant-garde of fashion without compromising traditional craftsmanship of luxury leather goods
Louis Vuitton
Louis Vuitton Replica
Louis Vuitton outlet is also active in other ...
CheapLouis VuittonReplica Handbags,Purses,Wallets Outlet and
Louis Vuitton Replica
Designer Bags,Shoes Outlet Store - discount price is our special offer, ...
Louis Vuitton Outlet
s| 8.20.09 @ 2:38AM
Cheap Jordan,Cheap Jordan shoes,Retro Jordan,Air Yeezy Shoes,Supra shoes,Kanye West ShoesJordan shoes,New Jordans,Air Yeezy,Air Force Ones,Nike Dunks,Retro Jordan, Cheap Jordan Shoes,Nike Dunk High,True Religion Jeans,New Air Force OnesAir Yeezy Shoe,Supra Shoes,Retro Jordan,Creative Recreation,Nike DunksNike Air YeezyTrue Religion,Air Jordan Shoes,Air Shox,Air Max,Dunk Shoes.Air Jordan,Cheap Jordans,Jordan Shoes,Cheap Air Jordans,Air Jordan Shoes
dropshippngwatch| 9.1.09 @ 11:38PM
Replica Watch
Replica Watches
Fake Watch
Sales Replica Watches
Fake Watches
Fake Watch
Replica Watch
Replica Watches
Fake Watch
replica Rolex watches
Replica Guess Watches
Replica Harry Winston Watches
Replica Hermes Watches
Replica Hublot Watches
Replica Hugo Boss Watches
Replica IWC Watches
Replica Jacob & Co Watches
Replica Jaeger-LECoultre Watches
http://www.dropshippingwatch.com
fsdfsd| 10.16.09 @ 3:57AM
shanghai massage
turntable bearings
hgkghkj| 2.4.10 @ 2:43AM
Flip, as the most popular pocket camcorder, is widely used by all users, with the product models of the Flip Ultra, the Flip Ultra HD, the Flip Video Mino, and the Flip Video Mino HD.
you can use Flip Converter as Flip HD video converter and Flip MP4 converter. Supporting all Flip camcorder models, it can also function as Flip Ultra converter and Flip Mino converter.
Flip Converter Mac is a newly-designed for Flip uses to convert flip video on mac os and convert flip hd video to mainstream video and audio formats supported by various portable players on mac.
ms office 2007| 3.18.10 @ 10:54PM
Office 2007 Pro
Office 2007 Ultimate