I discover your page while doing research on a paper I am writing on tax vs cap & trade for CA.
I commend you for the references and will get involved by sending the emails you suggest.
This is very good work you are doing.
James Dulgeroff, Ph.D.
Economics Dept. CSUSB
I am at your disposal to help disseminate your work. I will get a link to your site onto my website. I am also eager to meet with elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington if you have any delegations planned.
I suggest just two additional points for inclusion in your argument:
1. Cap and trade requires a complex market in a poorly understood and easily manipulated commodity (i.e. CO2 emission permits). Recent events in the mortgage derivatives markets illustrate the inherent risks of such markets.
2. The carbon fee should be rebated on exports at precisely the same rate that it is charged on imports, thus maintaining equity in world trade and encouraging other countries to follow our lead by developing their own domestic fee-and-rebate systems that reduce fossil fuel use without disadvantaging their trade. I suggest that the implicit carbon content of traded goods and services be set in a conservative manner at first (perhaps just carbon content plus the carbon equivalent of the energy consumed in manufacture as estimated from international best practices). An on-going process could be put in place to adjust implicit carbon contents as good research suggests is warranted.
While I personally favor splitting the collected fees 50:50 between a per capita rebate and a rebate proportional to payroll and self-employment taxes paid, that is a minor matter and not a debate that needs to be engaged at this stage.
Keep up the good work and contact me to help in any way you would find useful.
-Chris Chidsey
Associate Professor of Chemistry and Photon Science
Department of Chemistry, Stanford University
Laurie and Allan,
Your efforts are exemplary and inspiring. We are in the midst of a real test of democracy as to whether dedicated, truth-seeking citizen grassroots voices have standing and traction in the most consequential national debate in history.
As each of us in the public sector becomes more aware these national debates are being dominated by well-monied interests, it is incumbent upon each one of us to discriminate whether the proposed “solution” will enrich polluters or not.
Your well thought-out solutions represent the sort of fresh looks at endemic problems that are so rare in this debate. That your approaches resonate with James Hansen’s, confirms for me you’re on the right track.
May your efforts coalesce with countless others in a meaningful and timely way.
Once the public begins to understand the connections between cap and trade, the big banks and Wall Street, which will come out sooner or later, it could be politically devastating. Tom Friedman’s recent NYT column is one of the first to begin to explain this and more will follow. Consider the intense public outrage that has occurred regarding bonuses and the general public distrust of big banks and Wall Street in general. Now, look at some of the big players in the existing U.S. cap and trade program we have — EPA’s annual auctions of SO2 allowances as part of the market-based sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowance trading component of the Acid Rain Program. The annual results are available at: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/trading/auction.html. Big bank and investment company players over the last three years include: JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation; Cantor Fitzgerald Brokerage; Merrill Lynch Commodities Inc.; and Morgan Stanley.
February 21st, 2009 at 6:22 pm
I discover your page while doing research on a paper I am writing on tax vs cap & trade for CA.
I commend you for the references and will get involved by sending the emails you suggest.
This is very good work you are doing.
James Dulgeroff, Ph.D.
Economics Dept. CSUSB
February 23rd, 2009 at 6:22 am
Laurie and Allen,
Your discussion paper is fantastic.
I am at your disposal to help disseminate your work. I will get a link to your site onto my website. I am also eager to meet with elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington if you have any delegations planned.
I suggest just two additional points for inclusion in your argument:
1. Cap and trade requires a complex market in a poorly understood and easily manipulated commodity (i.e. CO2 emission permits). Recent events in the mortgage derivatives markets illustrate the inherent risks of such markets.
2. The carbon fee should be rebated on exports at precisely the same rate that it is charged on imports, thus maintaining equity in world trade and encouraging other countries to follow our lead by developing their own domestic fee-and-rebate systems that reduce fossil fuel use without disadvantaging their trade. I suggest that the implicit carbon content of traded goods and services be set in a conservative manner at first (perhaps just carbon content plus the carbon equivalent of the energy consumed in manufacture as estimated from international best practices). An on-going process could be put in place to adjust implicit carbon contents as good research suggests is warranted.
While I personally favor splitting the collected fees 50:50 between a per capita rebate and a rebate proportional to payroll and self-employment taxes paid, that is a minor matter and not a debate that needs to be engaged at this stage.
Keep up the good work and contact me to help in any way you would find useful.
-Chris Chidsey
Associate Professor of Chemistry and Photon Science
Department of Chemistry, Stanford University
March 27th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Laurie and Allan,
Your efforts are exemplary and inspiring. We are in the midst of a real test of democracy as to whether dedicated, truth-seeking citizen grassroots voices have standing and traction in the most consequential national debate in history.
As each of us in the public sector becomes more aware these national debates are being dominated by well-monied interests, it is incumbent upon each one of us to discriminate whether the proposed “solution” will enrich polluters or not.
Your well thought-out solutions represent the sort of fresh looks at endemic problems that are so rare in this debate. That your approaches resonate with James Hansen’s, confirms for me you’re on the right track.
May your efforts coalesce with countless others in a meaningful and timely way.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Once the public begins to understand the connections between cap and trade, the big banks and Wall Street, which will come out sooner or later, it could be politically devastating. Tom Friedman’s recent NYT column is one of the first to begin to explain this and more will follow. Consider the intense public outrage that has occurred regarding bonuses and the general public distrust of big banks and Wall Street in general. Now, look at some of the big players in the existing U.S. cap and trade program we have — EPA’s annual auctions of SO2 allowances as part of the market-based sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowance trading component of the Acid Rain Program. The annual results are available at: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/trading/auction.html. Big bank and investment company players over the last three years include: JP Morgan Ventures Energy Corporation; Cantor Fitzgerald Brokerage; Merrill Lynch Commodities Inc.; and Morgan Stanley.
Jeff Dauphin
eNewsUSA Blog: http://enewsusa.blogspot.com/
Friedman’s article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/opinion/08friedman.html
April 13th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
I was doing a paper on ETS and came across your discussion paper.
Thanks and well done!
Matt
B.com
McGill University