Sep
18
Understanding Cap And Trade Plans
September 18, 2007 |
Last night Tucker Eskew at Terra Rossa posted with a video from youtube that explains the “cap and trade” system to contain and reduce unwanted stuff in an economy. I go to some lengths to avoid political bias in what I post and Terra Rossa is clearly a “conservative” sort of site. Although not heavily and partisan driven like some sites its more mainstream and has a business tilt.
Tucker’s post is about a video that shows the motives, an example and some reasoning behind the cap and trade idea. With the US having already tried it we do know it can work. I can in fact support such an idea, but I would look at it from a more lifestyle view for people than a means to build business. My goal hasn’t moved from supporting and improving peoples lives. I worry that cap and trade having a success in the past would be so politicized that it would come into law deeply skewed to special interests leaving lots of the business economy out and the consumer holding the bills. But with my personal worries on the table lets go look at Terra Rossa and Tucker’s page from last night:
http://www.terrarossa.com/?p=225
The thing that spooks me is the grave vulnerability of the US economy to imported petroleum products. General Wald’s “full price for oil” number may well be right or even understated. But in any case, the costs of oil products are seldom considered in full. I sense that the full cost outside of the discovery chain to the consumer is a field in rich need of research. If those costs such as the military, environmental, and other costs needed to keep an oil economy going are prepared with a clearly laid out set of rules we could get a lot further faster in getting to the alternatives.
That makes the post and video very important. It’s likely a few steps in to a good start, but this process is in its infancy and deserves much more attention, thought, and development. I strongly urge you to click over to Terra Rossa and punch up views on this post. This sort of thing is what makes blogging such an improvement over media reporting. Share This Far and Wide!
Comments
2 Comments so far
We already have a cap and trade system in place.
It is called supply and demand.
Trade is capped by supply. Demand is capped by price.
===
You are assuming perfect knowledge.
Suppose by quadrupling CO2 output for 5 years we can eliminate 90% of CO2 production for ever. Suppose cap and trade limits you to 1.5X and you get no effect below a 4X increase.
All you are doing is adding an arbitrary constraint. Especially as looks increasingly likely climate scientists are cooking the books.
I don’t care if it is right, left, or Jesus promoting this stuff.
1. It is stupid
2. The evidence for doing anything is not so hot.
M. is correct. And assumes that everyone is smart using perfect knowledge - which is simply not the case. The arbitrary constraint compels the not so smart to behave in an controlled system. It sucks, its stupid, and it offers the smart opportunities to benefit beyond just making responsible choices, speeding the change along.