[Terrapreta] why we must relate to cap and trade

[Sean K. Barry]

Hi Lou,

I agree.  Cap-and-trade is more viable and politically possible during a recession, than would be a carbon tax.  It is hard to tell, though, whether which of "capping emissions and/or trading in emissions credits" or "paying a fossil carbon use tax" will more adversely effect economies.  I think "paying a fossil carbon use tax" will reduce consumtion sooner and be of greater benfit to the environment.

Regards,

SKB
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: lou gold<mailto:lou.gold at gmail.com> 
  To: still.thinking at computare.org<mailto:still.thinking at computare.org> 
  Cc: Terrapreta<mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org> 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:01 AM
  Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] why we must relate to cap and trade


  Duane,

  I know what you are talking about. 
  But the 10 years of talk-but-no-action 
  occurred in the context of denying that 
  there is a climate problem. Now that is 
  changing and the talk will move toward 
  cap-and-trade versus a carbon tax. I 
  believe (as a practical assessment of 
  the current state of climate politics) 
  that cap-and-trade -- though difficult -- 
  may have more political currency during 
  a recession than a new carbon tax. 

  Do you think otherwise?

  hugs,

  lou


  On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Duane Pendergast <still.thinking at computare.org<mailto:still.thinking at computare.org>> wrote:

                Morning Lou,



    Canada has been talking the talk, in depth, on cap and trade for ten years now. It's been going on so long now governments are just deleting their analytic reports and discussion from public websites. I recall Europe has been talking even longer.  Many folks are already advertising offset schemes and attempting to collect bucks. All this is having essentially no effect on greenhouse gas emissions. Talk is talk and not worth much, especially in an election year. Implementation of a real effective scheme is not so easy.



    Duane



    -----Original Message-----
    From: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org> [mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org<mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org>] On Behalf Of lou gold
    Sent: May 14, 2008 8:00 AM
    To: Terrapreta
    Subject: [Terrapreta] why we must relate to cap and trade




    There is a very interesting editorial in today's NY Times 

    May 14, 2008

    Editorial: The Post-Bush Climate
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/opinion/14wed1.html?hp=&pagewanted=print<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/opinion/14wed1.html?hp=&pagewanted=print>

    It notes that all three US presidential candidates have indicated that they favor some sort of cap-and-trade system. My guess is that cap-and-trade is coming. This means than there will soon be a huge pool of monies to support activities that are viewed as sequestering carbon. 

    This is becoming no longer a philosophical or ideological or moral matter. It is happening and many folks (the good, the bad, the etc) are positioning themselves to bargain for the offset bucks. 

    I believe that this is why we are suddenly seeing foolish proposals like growing and burying trees. Why? Because growing and burying trees has some concrete metrics associated with it. There is measurable carbon retrieval. There is measurable organic carbon to be buried (or perhaps sunk into oceans where big logs don't deteriorate). The point is that the discussion is shifting to metrics and the biochar movement better have some way to measure its benefits if it hopes to compete.




  -- 
  http://lougold.blogspot.com<http://lougold.blogspot.com/>
  http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets<http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets>
  http://youtube.com/my_videos<http://youtube.com/my_videos> _______________________________________________
  Terrapreta mailing list
  Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
  http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
  http://info.bioenergylists.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080514/b6b6f87b/attachment.html