Why Bush Doesn't Like Cap-and-Trade

You want an argument for why a cap-and-trade system makes more sense than a carbon tax if you want to reduce carbon emissions? Take a look at all the noise surrounding the Bush speech on the subject today. Bush's goal, of stopping growth in US carbon emissions by 2025, is incredibly weak. If that goal were legislated by means of a cap-and-trade system, the open-market cost of emitting carbon would be very close to zero. And yet such a system won't be proposed:

One person briefed on White House deliberations said a cap-and-trade program for electric utilities was dropped from the package yesterday, after the White House was flooded with complaints from industry officials and lobbyists.

What did the industry dislike? Simple: Once you've set up a cap-and-trade system with any cap at all, even the most unambitious, then at that point the cap can be changed. That is, of course, the key advantage of a cap-and-trade system: If it becomes obvious that emissions need to be reduced further, it's relatively easy to do so. On the other hand, given the political difficulty of getting any kind of tax hike through Congress, a carbon tax is much harder to tweak or to raise.

And so Bush's proposal is likely to be little more than yet another "strategy for a way forward" rather than anything substantive. That, too, is OK, in its way. If the Bush administration waffles and does nothing, then the door is wide open for the next president to implement a properly-thought-out cap-and-trade system, which is something all three remaining candidates support.

Comments

[MarineCorpsVet]

At least he's not one of the idiots that has fallen for this transparent scam. I'll believe we need it if you can prove to me scientifically that we need it. All anybody else can do is call me names for not "believing". Go to the website
www.icecap.us/
and read the articles by degreed atmospheric scientists or see arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/... if you're one of the "true believers" that are convinced that the polar ice caps are going to melt and drown us all. Or if you want to beat me over the head with the mantra that it is "settled science", you can go to
www.businessandmedia.o...
and see the names and credentials of some 400 prominent scientists, most of them atmospheric scientists that also are convinced that your globull smarming is B.S.

[MarineCorpsVet]

Sorry. The one website that I cited should be;
arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/.../

[gebby]

anyone not believing in the need to limit carbon is lost. countries are not fools like individuals refusing to believe. as usual bush is irrelevant. he continues to stand as an obstacle to progress. i will put my faith in the ipcc scientists that have stated that the probability of mans activities as causing global warming at 99% . the next administration will make the necessary changes and alot of money will be made on wall street as a result.

[CarlosSlim]

When the sentence begins with "Why Bush Doesn't Like...<fill-in-the...

..then you KNOW it will be a serious commentary about a serious subject.

Whatever Bush likes, we likes.

Whatever Bush eats, we eats.

We're Bush Men! We like Bush! Anything Bush says is OK with us!

Cause we're "mavericks".

You know...independent thinkers!

Free Market Libretarians!

[jcrash]

Marinecorps guy, you lost me right here "At least he's not one of the idiots..."

No, he is the king of idiots.

[jcrash]

FYI...try this link..then say the caps aren't melting.

www.keepwintercool.org...

This one:

irascibleprofessor.com...

This one:

www.csmonitor.com/2004...
Christian Science Monitor No less...not exactly liberal media.


There won't be an ice cap by the end of THIS century.

[jcrash]

Marinecorps Vet...your own link disproves you:

igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/c...

that link is on your second post's site. Obviously, there is less ice. Plus, the ice you see if you pick a winter's date (like today's) is THINNER (which their picture cannot tell you, but it obvious when you realize that more ice is gone in the summer).

[pockyclips 2020]

Well, it took the Vatican 500 years to admit the Earth isn't the center of the solar system. At current rate of consumption of fossil fuels, it will take only 50 years for the Neanderthals to cop to global warming. (Oops, My bad, they don't believe in evolution.)

This cap and trade nonsense will "fuel" the next big derivative meltdown.

[huangjin]

Cap and trade is a political scam. It wil be politics, not economics, as each industry lobbies to have their cap reduced. A tax has the advantage of being broad and more importantly, instead of giving industry a benefit, which will then be traded for profit by investment banks, with the cost being passed on to consumers, it will end up as federal revenue which can be offset with tax cuts. Cap & trade will make lobbyists, polluters, and traders rich, all at the expense of consumers. A tax will show us the real cost, in dollars, and consumers can have some of that cost offset.

I'm against both cap & trade and a tax, because the "science" is bunk (the predictive climate models are as reliable as S&P's 2006 AAA rating on subprime debt). But if there has to be one, the tax is the far, far better option.

[ironist15]

I agree with Huangjin. Global warming is nothing more than a government power grab, and we will be pay dearly in loss of wealth and freedom for it. Cap-and-trade is tailor-made for politicians because they must set the CO2 allotments for every industry and company - a perfect recipe for extortion and political gamesmanship. A carbon tax will do a lot of damage but not as much as a cap-and-trade system administered by corrupt politicans.

[NumbersGuy]

You know it's almost surreal that people continue to deny that we're impacting the environment by pumping all this carbon into the air. But I'm not going to change anyone's mind on that topic and it really doesn't matter.

I could also talk about Peak Oil and point out that we need to wean our economy from oil for that reason. But that could lead to a counter productive argument as well.

So let's ust look at oil prices as they are today. Are they jumping because the dollar has risen or because Peak Oil is upon us and demand for oil continues to grow from Asia and other developing areas? Probably it's all three of those things and it doesn't matter really, because the prices are what they are.

So what are we going to do about it? We need to use energy more efficiently or the economy will be brought to its knees. How do we make that happen? A Cap and Trade System or an Energy Tax seem to be the two ideas on the table right now. We need to do that to remain competitive regardless of what you think about climate change or peak oil. That's a fact on the ground that we must deal with.

I prefer a tax as it's more "efficient" but that might not be politically feasible. So cap and trade is likely part of our future. Either works for me because it incentivizes people and businesses to use energy more efficiently which saves money and makes us more competitive. And that's a good thing, right? No matter what you think of the politics?

[PK de C'ville]

MarineCorpsGuy:

"...are convinced that your globull smarming is B.S."

Here's a problem: What if we follow your leadership and find out the eggheads were right after all? Will it be too late? Do you want your grandchildren to live in a world with no ice caps, coastal cities underwater, and weather disasters being 1000 times more destructive?

I can't choose for you, but I don't want to risk our planet's future on your certainty that you're right about this. (Ever been wrong on something?)

[Whisper On The Wind]

I've read that the carbon dioxide is protecting us from global warming... with reliable data to prove it, statements and documentation from scientists... personally, I've been around long enough to see warm winters and cold ones, hot summers and cool ones, wet and dry seasons year round, and I'd rather just not hear any more. If there IS global warming in the next 100 years, and if it does drastically affect life on earth, then I would think that given another 100 years, they should have a different place to live, or another method of protection. And if they don't, so be it. I already drive a small car, have dialed down to 65 deg. in the winter, don't have lights on all the time, don't use AC until it's over 90 deg., and could even be convinced to shower with a friend, MAYBE. Beyond that? Go fly a kite. Add a key.

[devassocx]

Some here argue that the ice caps are melting. That may or not
be the case. But it is a real reach to blame that on CO2 emissions.
There are numerous web resources that dispute that conclusion.

So despite the mantra from the global warmers that the debate
is finished, I submit that it is far from finished and nearly every day
new data is revealed to dispute their position.

All of these plans to save us from ourselves are only going to result
in increased misery of those on the lower stack of humanity.

I propose that it makes a lot more sense to prioritize national efforts
to solve problems that are proven( We have plenty of those) and not some bad science, maybe theoretical made up problem that some groups wish were true in order to increase their collective power.

[Ames Tiedeman]

Industry does not much like it...