on the issue of Cap n Trade. FYI. Peggy

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Hansen <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 6:52 AM
Subject: Ways & Means
To: [email protected]


 To be removed from Jim Hansen's e-mail distribution, reply with REMOVE as
subject.

The answer to the riddle became clear on the train on the way home.  I had
puzzled about the continued attraction of Cap&Trade.  Empirical evidence
shows that Cap&Trade does not have a prayer of phasing out fossil fuel
emissions fast enough to save the planet, e.g., allowing us to phase-out
coal-fired power plants.  Clearly there must be people in the Obama
administration who understand that.  Yet Cap&Trade is still talked about as
if it were something good.  One wonders: do they really believe we have "a
planet in peril"?

The testimony that I gave to the House Ways & Means Committee is available
at
 
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2009/20090226_WaysAndMeans.pdf<http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/mailings/2009/20090226_WaysAndMeans.pdf>

In my testimony I noted that a "Cap" raises the price of energy, just as
does a simple honest carbon tax on oil, gas and coal at the first sale at
the mine or port of entry.  "Cap" is a pseudonym, disguising the fact that
it is a tax, assuming that the public is a bunch of dummies, who will never
catch on.  With all its hooks and eyes, Cap&Trade will allow a lot of funny
business.  At least we would get a few Wall Street millionaires back in
business, via speculation and gaming the Cap&Trade system (funded by John Q.
Public, of course).

On the train I read on politico.com that the number of lobbyists in DC
working to influence federal policy on climate change increased in the past
few years by 300% to 2,340 lobbyists -- four climate lobbyists for every
member of Congress.  At least the alligator shoe business is doing well.
Not too good for alligators, though.

A Carbon Tax & 100% Dividend would not let Congress enrich their favorites
or divine winning technologies.  Instead, the winners would be innovators
who invent products with improved energy efficiency or develop carbon-free
energies, which allow people to reduce their carbon tax.  Of course, if you
don't trust your innovation skills, it is easier to pay a lobbyist to get
Congress to adopt a jury-rigged Cap&Trade system.

2340 lobbyists.  They are outnumbered by the at least 2500 people, mostly
young people (but everybody welcome), who plan to converge on Washington
March 2 (despite inclement weather) to peacefully protest the Capitol Power
Plant, which our Congress insists must be powered substantially by coal (our
coal-black Senate seems to be the culprit).  The Capitol Power Plant is just
the symbolic target -- the real aim is to influence Congress to adopt
legislation that will rapidly phase out coal use.  See
http://capitolclimateaction.org/

The question is: who will Congress listen to? Protesters (bringing no gifts
- it's hard enough to pay their own way) or lobbyists (with lobbying
expenditures last year of about $90M).

Young folks, if you need an indication of what you are up against, let me
give you one example.  Peabody Coal (a.k.a. Peabody Energy) hires Dick
Gephardt, paying him $120,000.00 per quarter in 2008.  The amount of money
going into lobbying is increasing rapidly.  As Shakespeare would say, gird
up your loins.

If democracy does not win this one, if the lobbyists win, perhaps the best
we can do for our grandchildren is buy them a ticket to another planet.  Of
course, Congress would have to borrow the money from our grandchildren.  But
at least we would show that we are giving them some consideration.

Jim
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to