New G****l W*****g Proposal: Tax CO2, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, what a "Charade"
Jul 10, 2015 14:49:02 #
Climate Talks a 'Charade,' Pushes Plan C
The liberal economist says voluntary agreements don't work and cap-and-trade is 'doomed to failure'
Joseph Stiglitz: What the world needs now is a global carbon price
Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate economist, is trying to persuade global-warming negotiators that they're marching up a blind alley.
He says it's probably too late to achieve anything substantial at the long-awaited United Nations C*****e C****e Conference in Paris in December, so real progress will have to come afterward.
That's not a message the negotiators want to hear, but Stiglitz doesn't care. "Im saying we ought to be facing reality. We have to learn from our failures," he said in a phone interview this week.
Stiglitz gave Bloomberg reporters a preview of remarks he was scheduled to deliver today in Paris at the International Scientific Conference, one of the last big conclaves leading up to the December summit. Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University in New York, may be the favorite American economist of the developing world, because he often takes its side against the rich countries, particularly the U.S.
Plan A for c*****e c****e was a cap-and-trade system: Set caps on the amount of greenhouse gases that countries could spew into the air, then let those countries trade their emission rights with each other. Emitters that can cut cheaply make the biggest reductions, so cap-and-trade achieves any given amount of emission reductions at the lowest possible cost.
But cap-and-trade won't work without enforceable caps, and countries haven't been able to agree on what those caps should be. Stiglitz says that's inevitable. Giving big allowances to big emitters inadvertently rewards them for having caused a lot of g****l w*****g in the past and is "clearly morally and politically unacceptable," Stiglitz says.
On the other hand, giving allowances to countries on a per-capita basis would be attractive to poor ones with large populations, but "I dont see any hope of getting the United States to agree to an equal sharing of carbon space." His bottom line: "Cap-and-trade is doomed to failure."
He isn't impressed with Plan B, either, which is the voluntary commitments that countries have been announcing leading up to the Paris summit. "In the absence of more forceful actions, voluntary actions simply dont solve problems of global public goods," he says. In other words, countries won't do enough if there's no compulsion involved.
Stiglitz's plan is to set a single, global price for carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas. The idea is to make it so expensive to use carbon that consumers and businesses voluntarily use less of it. Countries could raise the price of carbon either with a tax or with a domestic cap-and-trade system, Stiglitz says.
In his vision, if a country didn't set its carbon price high enough, hoping to gain a pricing advantage, other countries would be allowed to charge tariffs on its exports. He would throw in a green fund to compensate hard-hit poor countries.
Six big non-U.S. oil companiesBG Group, BP, Eni, Royal Dutch Shell, Statoil, and Totalcame out in favor of a global carbon price in a letter released by one of its recipients, the United Nations, on June 1.
This isn't the first time Stiglitz has come out for a carbon tax; it's been on his agenda for several years. And some other economists still think cap-and-trade is a better solution.
Jean Tirole, a fellow Nobel laureate in economics, co-wrote a piece for the Economist's Free Exchange blog last month saying that "enforcement of a carbon tax is also problematic, because governments have strong incentives to turn a blind eye toward certain polluters."
As for the conference in Paris in December, Stiglitz told Bloomberg simply: "It's a charade."
The liberal economist says voluntary agreements don't work and cap-and-trade is 'doomed to failure'
Joseph Stiglitz: What the world needs now is a global carbon price
Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate economist, is trying to persuade global-warming negotiators that they're marching up a blind alley.
He says it's probably too late to achieve anything substantial at the long-awaited United Nations C*****e C****e Conference in Paris in December, so real progress will have to come afterward.
That's not a message the negotiators want to hear, but Stiglitz doesn't care. "Im saying we ought to be facing reality. We have to learn from our failures," he said in a phone interview this week.
Stiglitz gave Bloomberg reporters a preview of remarks he was scheduled to deliver today in Paris at the International Scientific Conference, one of the last big conclaves leading up to the December summit. Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University in New York, may be the favorite American economist of the developing world, because he often takes its side against the rich countries, particularly the U.S.
Plan A for c*****e c****e was a cap-and-trade system: Set caps on the amount of greenhouse gases that countries could spew into the air, then let those countries trade their emission rights with each other. Emitters that can cut cheaply make the biggest reductions, so cap-and-trade achieves any given amount of emission reductions at the lowest possible cost.
But cap-and-trade won't work without enforceable caps, and countries haven't been able to agree on what those caps should be. Stiglitz says that's inevitable. Giving big allowances to big emitters inadvertently rewards them for having caused a lot of g****l w*****g in the past and is "clearly morally and politically unacceptable," Stiglitz says.
On the other hand, giving allowances to countries on a per-capita basis would be attractive to poor ones with large populations, but "I dont see any hope of getting the United States to agree to an equal sharing of carbon space." His bottom line: "Cap-and-trade is doomed to failure."
He isn't impressed with Plan B, either, which is the voluntary commitments that countries have been announcing leading up to the Paris summit. "In the absence of more forceful actions, voluntary actions simply dont solve problems of global public goods," he says. In other words, countries won't do enough if there's no compulsion involved.
Stiglitz's plan is to set a single, global price for carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas. The idea is to make it so expensive to use carbon that consumers and businesses voluntarily use less of it. Countries could raise the price of carbon either with a tax or with a domestic cap-and-trade system, Stiglitz says.
In his vision, if a country didn't set its carbon price high enough, hoping to gain a pricing advantage, other countries would be allowed to charge tariffs on its exports. He would throw in a green fund to compensate hard-hit poor countries.
Six big non-U.S. oil companiesBG Group, BP, Eni, Royal Dutch Shell, Statoil, and Totalcame out in favor of a global carbon price in a letter released by one of its recipients, the United Nations, on June 1.
This isn't the first time Stiglitz has come out for a carbon tax; it's been on his agenda for several years. And some other economists still think cap-and-trade is a better solution.
Jean Tirole, a fellow Nobel laureate in economics, co-wrote a piece for the Economist's Free Exchange blog last month saying that "enforcement of a carbon tax is also problematic, because governments have strong incentives to turn a blind eye toward certain polluters."
As for the conference in Paris in December, Stiglitz told Bloomberg simply: "It's a charade."
Jul 10, 2015 14:59:40 #
China And India Are Currently The Two Biggest Polluters At All Levels
Bathing In The Ganges Will Give You Open Sores
They Were The Ones That Closed The Last Summit
Bathing In The Ganges Will Give You Open Sores
They Were The Ones That Closed The Last Summit
Jul 10, 2015 15:07:45 #
karpenter wrote:
China And India Are Currently The Two Biggest Polluters At All Levels.
Bathing In The Ganges Will Give You Open Sores.
They Were The Ones That Closed The Last Summit
China And India Are Currently The Two Biggest Polluters At All Levels.
Bathing In The Ganges Will Give You Open Sores.
They Were The Ones That Closed The Last Summit
And my predictions of the summit in Paris, it will go no where, Duhhhhh.
Why would you tax your own country for CO2 emissions, thats why the Paris accords will fail.
But they are really trying with the G****l w*****g skewed data.
They said this country alone in the first six month had record increases in temperature. They didn't say anything about CO2 emissions.
This was the coldest temperature records set back in the 40's
They the G****l W*****g skeptics are full of compost in their data and the propaganda that they spew.
Jul 10, 2015 15:18:48 #
Read This Entire Article
It Was Opined By The Founder Of Green Peace
He Still Gets Environmental Awards
Why I am a C*****e C****e Skeptic
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/20/why-i-am-c*****e-c****e-skeptic
He Claims That Global CO2 Levels Are Just Off Planetary Lows
And That The Pollution Of The Industrial Revolution Saved Us From Mass Extinction
In Part:
Interested ?? Read It...
The Article Starts With His Academic Credentials
It Was Opined By The Founder Of Green Peace
He Still Gets Environmental Awards
Why I am a C*****e C****e Skeptic
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/20/why-i-am-c*****e-c****e-skeptic
He Claims That Global CO2 Levels Are Just Off Planetary Lows
And That The Pollution Of The Industrial Revolution Saved Us From Mass Extinction
In Part:
Quote:
My skepticism begins with the believers certainty... (show quote)
Interested ?? Read It...
The Article Starts With His Academic Credentials
Jul 10, 2015 15:24:02 #
karpenter wrote:
Read This Entire Article br It Was Opined By The F... (show quote)
Got the cite bookmarked
http://news.heartland.org
Thanks
Jul 10, 2015 15:36:17 #
G****l W*****g is greatly over-rated. There is very little g****l w*****g. There is no need for costly draconian measures. Jack H. Stuart. patriot.jhs@gmail.com
Jul 10, 2015 15:48:15 #
Scientifically All one needs is to understand is the Green House gasses, more importantly CO2 and the percentages.
They have only recorded the levels since 1989. This is where the alarm rates from the G****l W*****g alarmists come's from. The Ice core samples are the key to understanding CO2 levels and the green house effect from 100,000 of thousands of years ago.
But mainly it is the earth's relationship to the Sun which is the driving force to G****l W*****g here on earth. But you will never hear from a G****l W*****g denier.
Their real agendas is pollution control guised as G****l w*****g.
They have only recorded the levels since 1989. This is where the alarm rates from the G****l W*****g alarmists come's from. The Ice core samples are the key to understanding CO2 levels and the green house effect from 100,000 of thousands of years ago.
But mainly it is the earth's relationship to the Sun which is the driving force to G****l W*****g here on earth. But you will never hear from a G****l W*****g denier.
Their real agendas is pollution control guised as G****l w*****g.
Jul 10, 2015 16:12:59 #
You Mean Hear About Sun Activity From A 'G****l W*****g Alarmist' ??
Detractors Are The Only Ones That Try To Bring It Up
Detractors Are The Only Ones That Try To Bring It Up
Jul 10, 2015 16:30:23 #
Jul 10, 2015 21:55:29 #
Look At This:
Scientists warn the sun will 'go to sleep' in 2030 and could cause temperatures to plummet
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html
Scientists warn the sun will 'go to sleep' in 2030 and could cause temperatures to plummet
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html
Quote:
They Got Us Comin' An Goin', Don't They ??The new model of the Sun's solar cycle is producing unprecedentedly accurate predictions of irregularities within the Sun's 11-year heartbeat.
It draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone.
Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the 'mini ice age' that began in 1645
It draws on dynamo effects in two layers of the Sun, one close to the surface and one deep within its convection zone.
Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the 'mini ice age' that began in 1645
Jul 10, 2015 23:02:03 #
Ridiculous, remember that they are the brightest of the brightest, a ten watt bulb bright.
G****l W*****g Alarmists next thing they will try to do is tax the methane out of your ass, pure lunacy
G****l W*****g Alarmists next thing they will try to do is tax the methane out of your ass, pure lunacy
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.