Comments on: What will make Obama a great president, Part 2: A climate deal with China http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:56:12 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Bill http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/#comment-26746 Bill Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:39:00 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/#comment-26746 A proposal to get the Chinese onboard: 1. Change the international approach to get away from existing country-by-country targets, an approach which favors developed economies, and replace it with a zero-based, global cap and trade system, with 100% of emission rights auctioned off, and revenues rebated to the country less a deduction for audit costs. Base the cap on participating GDP totals. Such a system would favor developing economies who are not yet as carbon dependent as the developed world. And the Chinese would like it, as they would figure out they own the payors and the payee. 2. Impose a 100% duty on imports from any country that refuses to participate. 3. Kick it off after 75% of global GDP agree to participate, to eliminate the carbon leakage risk and get the developed world on board. 4. Do it sector by sector, pollutant by pollutant, as they are measurable, as was done with the Montreal Protocol. Thoughts? A proposal to get the Chinese onboard:
1. Change the international approach to get away from existing country-by-country targets, an approach which favors developed economies, and replace it with a zero-based, global cap and trade system, with 100% of emission rights auctioned off, and revenues rebated to the country less a deduction for audit costs. Base the cap on participating GDP totals. Such a system would favor developing economies who are not yet as carbon dependent as the developed world. And the Chinese would like it, as they would figure out they own the payors and the payee.
2. Impose a 100% duty on imports from any country that refuses to participate.
3. Kick it off after 75% of global GDP agree to participate, to eliminate the carbon leakage risk and get the developed world on board.
4. Do it sector by sector, pollutant by pollutant, as they are measurable, as was done with the Montreal Protocol.
Thoughts?

]]> By: hapa http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/#comment-23856 hapa Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:57:57 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/#comment-23856 lots of that came from <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/11/blog-post.html" rel="nofollow">this by yves smith</a> but don't blame her lots of that came from this by yves smith but don’t blame her

]]> By: hapa http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/#comment-23853 hapa Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:38:20 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/04/what-will-make-obama-a-great-president-part-2-a-climate-deal-with-china/#comment-23853 production and deployment targets for the US/eurozone/china/india would also help the rest of the great global factory move quicker with retooling. china's supply chain is as big a force on them as their investments in the dollar and in foreign consumers -- even in a stable situation with plenty of oil and healthy banks, their domestic market wouldn't have been able to support an international parts business for a long time, is how it looks. so major goals have to be set, i think. much much bigger than stable subsidies for clean tech. it doesn't seem like even with those healthy banks we really have an idea how fast we can shift from what the global factory produces now to either localized or global clean-safe production of clean-safe equipment. we need to start thinking of moving away from dirty-dangerous processes as another form of necessary deleveraging. production and deployment targets for the US/eurozone/china/india would also help the rest of the great global factory move quicker with retooling. china’s supply chain is as big a force on them as their investments in the dollar and in foreign consumers — even in a stable situation with plenty of oil and healthy banks, their domestic market wouldn’t have been able to support an international parts business for a long time, is how it looks. so major goals have to be set, i think. much much bigger than stable subsidies for clean tech.

it doesn’t seem like even with those healthy banks we really have an idea how fast we can shift from what the global factory produces now to either localized or global clean-safe production of clean-safe equipment. we need to start thinking of moving away from dirty-dangerous processes as another form of necessary deleveraging.

]]>