The proof is in the pudding
Q: If the Senate moves away from a climate bill that includes cap-and-trade -- a strategy, which allows companies and organizations to buy and sell pollution credits to meet a national limit on greenhouse gas emissions -- what alternatives should be included in the bill instead?
We have some pretty good intelligence on the climate bill being championed by Senators Kerry, Lieberman and Graham. Still, I am not going to play the speculation game.
Let's wait and see the bill before we jump to either support or reject their efforts.
We will judge the merits of the measure on how well it meets the criteria we have endorsed from the beginning of the debate. While that position leaves open the possibility of backing a hybrid plan, it leans heavily toward cap-and-trade, for the simple reason that it is a proven system that works.
Probably more important to us than the methodology is which sector is going to bear the brunt of the responsibility. Utilities produce about 40 percent of this country's carbon dioxide emissions. Other industries and transportation all play large roles. A climate bill must offer a solution that is economy wide and has environmental integrity.
Furthermore, the bill must offer incentives for new technology - not only for clean and renewable forms of generation and conservation, but also for carbon capture and storage. We can't afford not to find ways to produce energy from coal cleanly and efficiently.
Finally, the bill must provide a reasonable schedule for achieving reductions, a workable array of potential offsets and, if it retains cap and trade, provide 40 percent of the original allowances to the electricity sector to ease the cost impact on consumers.
Posted by: randomsample | March 6, 2010 6:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment