The biggest alarm bell that should have gone off for media reporting on all this in 2011, was not just that the 2002 discussion paper was nine years out of date, but that it was written three years prior to the Jan. 1, 2005 start-up of the one, significant, real-world example we have of a cap-and-trade market in carbon dioxide emissions.Here's the solution that will work: forget about this Orwellian war on bad weather and start addressing real problems such as air and water pollution.
That’s Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
And a “scheme” is exactly what it has turned out to be — plagued by multi-billion-dollar tax frauds and built on a carbon credit system riddled with fraud and corruption.
Not only did the ETS not lower emissions — they kept rising until the 2008 global recession — the biggest losers were ordinary Europeans, hit with higher energy bills and retail prices, while the biggest winners were energy companies, speculators and organized crime.
While the authors of this 2002 report can be excused for suggesting a cap-and-trade scheme in carbon dioxide emissions might work in theory, it was absurd in 2011 to report on its findings, without citing the real-world experience with cap-and-trade since 2005.
Which brings us to the report’s argument government regulations won’t work as well as cap-and-trade.
Actually, it’s hard to imagine anything could be worse, or less effective, than cap-and-trade, including a carbon tax.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Check out this article by Lorrie Goldstein: