Comments on: In today’s big economic speech, Obama reaffirms his commitment to a clean energy economy and strong climate bill: “The only way to truly spark this transformation is through a gradual, market-based cap on carbon pollution”

By: Eleanor oil jobs

Eleanor oil jobs — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:03:37 +0000

Fantastic … I agree 100%

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:42:06 +0000

Kaitlin — Have them burn algae or else biochar made from algae.

By: CTF

CTF — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:59:34 +0000

While I applaud the President’s aim of “closing this carbon pollution loophole” and spurring clean energy investment, I don’t think that the cap-and-trade system currently proposed on Capitol Hill is the best route to meet either of those goals. In fact, the carbon market already in place in Europe — a system described by the Washington Post in 2007 as a “bureaucratic morass with a host of unexpected and costly side effects and a much smaller effect on carbon emissions than planned” — plainly illustrates the shortcomings of this policy. And for that reason (and a myriad of others), economists, scientists and “green” opinion leaders are lining up behind other policy options, specifically, a revenue-neutral carbon tax. The bottom line is that a carbon tax isn’t subject to the extreme price volatility generated by an inflexible carbon cap. Consequently, its stable price would encourage new investors to put capital in new energy R&D and would incentivize U.S. businesses to invest in more efficient energy sources.

By: Neil Howes

Neil Howes — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:04:32 +0000

Replying to Jim Beacon’s “Ticket and Trade” if 1,000 have speeding tickets last year, this year’s “Ticket and trade” would be for 900, you may find that 1000 speeders are going to bid up the price way above $200, and next year the cap will be 800…., end RESULT fewer speeders.

Focus on the CAP on CO2, this is the critical part, not the trade (no cap on price)which is a mechanism for reducing collateral damage. Taxes on CO2 do not guarantee results, CAPS do.

By: john

john — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 02:59:26 +0000

Whenever I have problems with Obama — and I do — I remember bush, and everything seems quite tolerable.

I have the sense that this man is turning the battleship, and that it takes time and care. but he wants to steer the ship of state in the same direction I do.

It’ll be OK. (If he fires Summers and Geithener)

By: ecostew

ecostew — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:29:50 +0000

Kaitlin, are watching the EPA on the issue?

By: Kaitlin

Kaitlin — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:53:15 +0000

I am not sure why we have to wait on transforming this society into a cleaner, greener, more environmentally friendly place until the recession and economy has settled.

Wouldn’t restructuring how we do business and limiting pollutants and what not demand more alternative source and stimulate new technology and jobs? If we actually had stricter regulations on coal and carbon emissions it would seem those companies would be forced to innovate and conform with the laws, but I suppose that is a naive view, and caps could only make pay offs and under handed plans more alluring and popular.

So I guess the question is really, how do we get everyone to go along with getting away from coal? How do you quit lining big business’ pockets with the nasty residue of carbon?

By: Pangolin

Pangolin — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:43:49 +0000

All without installing any actual hardware to make clean power or reduce fossil fuel consumption. My reading of the Waxman bill is that it sends money everywhere but to the actual installation of the hardware that will diminish the market for coal.

If I’m wrong about this, please, please, point out exactly how much of the moneys specified in the bill will go towards funding equipment instead of smokescreens

By: Jeff R.

Jeff R. — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:41:43 +0000

[correction]

Mr. Secular Animist.
You said,

“Good, but Obama is behind the curve. Investors are already putting lots of money into new energy technologies, and have been for some time.”

No. You don’t grasp the scale of the capital commitment that is necessary for a major overhaul of our energy services infrastructure. A credible commitment from the federal government to “close the carbon loophole” (as he brilliantly puts it!) must be made, and proposed energy legislation is just such a commitment.

The Bellwether for when the markets have accepted this commitment is when ExxonMobil, Chevron stocks are 1/10 of what they are today. (No, electric utility shares will not inevitably fall – but they might.)

By: Jeff R.

Jeff R. — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:38:58 +0000

Mr. Secular Animist.
You said,

“Good, but Obama is behind the curve. Investors are already putting lots of money into new energy technologies, and have been for some time.”