[Big Mac]

I'm surprised there has been no thread dedicated to Cap-and-Trade around here, given its potentially far-reaching implications. I'm highly skeptical of it. It just narrowly passed the strongly Democratic House, so some are saying it's dead in the Senate. Then again, some Senators are talking about the Nuclear Option to ram it through. Assuming it gets passed, I'd like to know what will happen if consumer energy prices "skyrocket," as Obama first stated unequivocally, as compared to his current claim that consumers will pay only a postage stamp more per day.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I'd like to know what will happen if consumer energy prices "skyrocket," as Obama first stated unequivocally, as compared to his current claim that consumers will pay only a postage stamp more per day.

People are only so long going to put up with all the crap the Obama administration is administering.

Question is: how long is "so long" ?

By mid of next year, when unemployment (U3) is above 12%, and U6 unemployment will rise well above 20%, there is going to be massive uprising.

-t

[Big Mac]

Sometimes I wish the Founders had given us a Parliamentary Republic instead of a president, with the assumption that prime ministers are more accountable to the legislature and thus ultimately to the people. If the Founders had known how unconstitutionally empowered the federal government would become, I think that's what they would have wanted instead. Maybe the president's powers should have been invested in the Senate Majority Leader instead. On the other hand, I know the Founders would consider today's federal government a tyranny - tyranny of the majority and tyranny of the SIGs.

I hope Cap-and-Trade doesn't pass, if for no other reason than because I take Obama at his original word and don't see any cause to believe his radically altered outlook that he has now provided to help secure passage of the bill.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Sometimes I wish the Founders had given us a Parliamentary Republic instead of a president, with the assumption that prime ministers are more accountable to the legislature and thus ultimately to the people.

[stumblinmike]

Considering your track record, if you three are against it, not only is it a great thing, but it WILL happen. Next?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

Considering your track record, if you three are against it, not only is it a great thing, but it WILL happen. Next?

Yes, it's a great thing. It'll utterly destroy Amerika's economy, leaving standing only those who know it's coming and have thus prepared. That excludes you.

I'll be at a safe distance on the back of my yacht, doing this:

[Chongo]

So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250K. (like the cigarette tax increase, the....)

[SpaceMonkey]

Of course, in the clip that you linked to Obama was referring to a broadly-defined, hypothetical plan and not an actual piece of legislation that tried to appease conservative Democrats in energy-producing states by incorporating various allowances, off-sets and tax breaks. The CBO report that led to the "postage stamp" talking point has some issues but it is based on actual numbers.

If it's any consolation, some environmental groups are unhappy with the House bill because they see it as being not strict enough.

[ctt1wbw]

I think Spain and Australia are getting rid of their Cap and Trade garbage. And isn't the unemployment rate in Spain approaching 19-20%...?

Plus, basing almost 2000 pages of legislation on as yet to be proven science is pretty stupid. Global warming isn't a scientific fact, it's still a theory. That's why it's called Climate Change now, because pro Global Warming advocates can't convince people of their theory as being fact, so they change the name to hide the truth.

It's almost July here in Stanley and the temp is 77 at 12 in the afternoon.

[stumblinmike]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Yes, it's a great thing. It'll utterly destroy Amerika's economy, leaving standing only those who know it's coming and have thus prepared. That excludes you.

I'll be at a safe distance on the back of my yacht, doing this:

I know Nelson Muntz. Nelson Muntz is a friend of mine. You, Sir Doofy, are NO Nelson Muntz!!!
ps: If so flush with cash, why so many worries? Household help may revolt?

[Doofy]

I'll tell ya what's happening here, folks.

The current money system is reaching its stretching point and will collapse sometime in the next 30 years. "Carbon credits" will be the new system.

You heard it here first.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

ps: If so flush with cash, why so many worries? Household help may revolt?

Can you point to anywhere where I've said I'm worried?

[stumblinmike]

I stand corrected! I ASSUMED you were concerned...I should have known better. Apologies...

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Of course, in the clip that you linked to Obama was referring to a broadly-defined, hypothetical plan and not an actual piece of legislation...

You mean like the one nobody read before voting on it?

[Chongo]

The Senators from the coal mining and coal burning states will kill the bill. Hell, the House version removed the tax on bovine methane emissions just to get the votes to pass.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

The Senators from the coal mining and coal burning states will kill the bill. Hell, the House version removed the tax on bovine methane emissions just to get the votes to pass.

We can only hope.

[ctt1wbw]

That just shows the extent of taxation that Dems want. Taxing cow farts and burps? Give me a break please.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I'll tell ya what's happening here, folks.

The current money system is reaching its stretching point and will collapse sometime in the next 30 years. "Carbon credits" will be the new system.

You heard it here first.

So what you're saying is that the US is moving towards becoming a Technate? A carbon credit monetary system sounds an awful lot like energy accounting.

Actually, this all jives fairly well with the North American Union conspiracy theories. I'm pretty sure such a political entity has been proposed as necessary to form a viable Technate...

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

So what you're saying is that the US is moving towards becoming a Technate? A carbon credit monetary system sounds an awful lot like energy accounting.

The US? No. The World.
It's a form of communism. If you can't buy anything without personal carbon credits, and everyone is issued with the same ration of carbon credits...

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Actually, this all jives fairly well with the North American Union conspiracy theories. I'm pretty sure such a political entity has been proposed as necessary to form a viable Technate...

Yup.

[ctt1wbw]

How about taxing the hell out of babies, since they are made out of carbon? And everytime your dog has puppies, that should be a grand penalty because too much carbon was released on our precious Earth.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Repeated inability to distinguish between carbon and carbon dioxide: priceless

[turtle777]

Crap and Turd.

I'm all for it.

-t

[smacintush]

It doesn't matter what kind of effect this would have on our economy. They have a higher purpose here.

They are saving the planet.

Things like economic and personal freedom and economic security and prosperity pale in comparison to the importance of what they are doing. I mean, how can you sit here and whine about your precious ****ing money when the earth is dying??????

If they don't raise taxes do something now the earth will be a wasteland. Wake up people.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Repeated inability to distinguish between carbon and carbon dioxide: priceless

Am I mistaken or don't babies and puppies exhale CO₂? Can't something be done about that? Don't they know what they are doing to mother earth?

[ctt1wbw]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Repeated inability to distinguish between carbon and carbon dioxide: priceless

Uh, the reason I made that point was because this thing is called Carbon Trading. Not Carbon Dioxide Trading.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

They are saving the planet.

From what? Oh yeah, that "global warming" stuff that hasn't happened in years. Save us from something that doesn't exist, by taxing out of our money.

THANKS!

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

I think Spain and Australia are getting rid of their Cap and Trade garbage

I'm not too worried. If it passes, we'll be getting rid of our cap and trade garbage in a few years as well, since those who might pass it won't likely be in office anymore. Obama should have explained that this would also be a "cap and trade" on Democrats in office and gotten everyone on board.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Am I mistaken or don't babies and puppies exhale CO₂? Can't something be done about that? Don't they know what they are doing to mother earth?

Google carbon cycle - Wiki is your knowledge friend.

But you can still off babies and puppies if that's really what you're into

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Uh, the reason I made that point was because this thing is called Carbon Trading. Not Carbon Dioxide Trading.

No, the reason you made this point is because you don't know what you're talking about.

greg

[ctt1wbw]

Thanks for clearing that up for me. Taxing carbon dioxide.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

No prob... no biggie either way; it's just an issue of semantics, really. (But hey, that's what the intarweb is for!)

"Greenhouse gas(es)" (GHG) is probably the best term to use, and AFAIK that's what cap-and-trade systems attempt to address - the small list of compounds which have a heat-blocking affect. At least that includes CO2 as well as methane, nitrous oxides, yadda yadda yadda.

I was also under the impression that the US already had a national/regional cap-and-trade system in place re: acid rain (sulfur dioxides/nitrogen oxides emissions). Anyone have any information on how that particular system has/hasn't been working?

greg

[ctt1wbw]

I don't mean to bring elementary biology into it, but do not plants use CO2 to make oxygen? I know carbon dioxide is the new evil, but come one. Let's get real people.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

I don't mean to bring elementary biology into it, but do not plants use CO2 to make oxygen? I know carbon dioxide is the new evil, but come one. Let's get real people.

Yes, and a related problem is that we've been getting rid of a lot of the world's plants.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

I don't mean to bring elementary biology into it, but do not plants use CO2 to make oxygen? I know carbon dioxide is the new evil, but come one. Let's get real people.

And I guess you assume that the smartass scientists working on this problem neglected to take grade 9 biology into account?

(Although your comment is at least a part-answer to scmacintush's question )

greg

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

I was also under the impression that the US already had a national/regional cap-and-trade system in place re: acid rain (sulfur dioxides/nitrogen oxides emissions). Anyone have any information on how that particular system has/hasn't been working?

Pretty well. It met its target in 2007.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

No prob... no biggie either way; it's just an issue of semantics, really. (But hey, that's what the intarweb is for!)

"Greenhouse gas(es)" (GHG) is probably the best term to use, and AFAIK that's what cap-and-trade systems attempt to address - the small list of compounds which have a heat-blocking affect. At least that includes CO2 as well as methane, nitrous oxides, yadda yadda yadda.

I was also under the impression that the US already had a national/regional cap-and-trade system in place re: acid rain (sulfur dioxides/nitrogen oxides emissions). Anyone have any information on how that particular system has/hasn't been working?

greg

BTW, what happened to the "freon will destroy the ozone" crowd. Dupont may not be produced it in the US anymore, but there is a huge supply stockpiled. The stuff that replaced it, like r134a, are worse than r12. Be careful what you ask for!

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Yes, and a related problem is that we've been getting rid of a lot of the world's plants.

NO, YOU HAVE IT WRONG! IT'S ALL THE EXCESS CO2 WHICH IS KILLING ALL THE PLANTS!

(or at least that's what some hippie tried to tell me the other day)

[ctt1wbw]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

And I guess you assume that the smartass scientists working on this problem neglected to take grade 9 biology into account?

(Although your comment is at least a part-answer to scmacintush's question )

greg

Ben watching the news lately? Seems these scientists had a report saying that the world's temps are the same as they were 50 years ago, and that they are actually going down. This report was buried by the EPA. Check it out, it's all over the news.

And don't tell me you know more about global warming than everyone else. It's a THEORY, not PROVEN FACT. If it is a fact, then there should be ways to PROVE it.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Yes, and a related problem is that we've been getting rid of a lot of the world's plants.

I blame the vegetarians. Eat more meat - problem solved.

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

And don't tell me you know more about global warming than everyone else. It's a THEORY, not PROVEN FACT. If it is a fact, then there should be ways to PROVE it.

Your knowledge of the scientific method is astoundingly bad.

[BadKosh]

The Global warming "Science" is at least as accurate as Phrenology. The same quality of work has gone into each. Both are as provable.

[ctt1wbw]

Why thank you. I just don't open wide and get spoonfed by the media like everyone else here does. Btw, it's 81 outside now at almost noon. In Virginia. Yeah, that global warming is a killer!

[ctt1wbw]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

The Global warming "Science" is at least as accurate as Phrenology. The same quality of work has gone into each. Both are as provable.

Then PROVE it. I want to see scientific methods on how you say Global Warming has been proven to be a fact.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Then PROVE it. I want to see scientific methods on how you say Global Warming has been proven to be a fact.

I think you missed the joke: Phrenology.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Pretty well. It met its target in 2007.

Hey, thanks. I should really look into that. I wonder how it's different than the CAT system under discussion, and if any of the dire predictions in here have been attributable to that system? Maybe Wiki will have something.

Originally Posted by Chongo 

BTW, what happened to the "freon will destroy the ozone" crowd. Dupont may not be produced it in the US anymore, but there is a huge supply stockpiled. The stuff that replaced it, like r134a, are worse than r12. Be careful what you ask for!

Uhhhh... you mean the issue of ozone layer depletion? Still around as far as I know. I admit that I don't know much about the different CFC variations; how is r134a worse than r12 exactly?

Originally Posted by Doofy 

NO, YOU HAVE IT WRONG! IT'S ALL THE EXCESS CO2 WHICH IS KILLING ALL THE PLANTS!

(or at least that's what some hippie tried to tell me the other day)

Hahahaha classic! We're giving them too much food!

greg

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Why thank you. I just don't open wide and get spoonfed by the media like everyone else here does. Btw, it's 81 outside now at almost noon. In Virginia. Yeah, that global warming is a killer!

Yeap you're a free-thinking maverick, you are

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Hey, thanks. I should really look into that. I wonder how it's different than the CAT system under discussion, and if any of the dire predictions in here have been attributable to that system? Maybe Wiki will have something.

Well one of the major differences is the scale of regulation, both in terms of industries and emissions. The Acid Rain Program was targeting a more specific environmental impact. And while the Acid Rain Program met its emissions targets ahead of schedule, the actual acidity of lakes and streams hasn't improved as much as anticipated, in part because of new understandings of how sulfur moves through groundwater. EPA is still working on a steeper, more costly sulfur dioxide cap that utility companies have been resistant to. Another factor for why the program has been less economically costly overall is that when it was introduced, there were scrubbing and low-sulfur technologies just coming online or becoming much more affordable, so there was a ready alternative that may not exist currently for controlling CO2 emissions.

The more recent Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is a closer analogue to the Waxman-Markey plan, both in terms of the emissions covered and the method of allocating and selling permits, but it's so new and had such modest targets that it's hard to draw many conclusions about its effects. It's implementation is seen as a model, though, and there is desire to fold it into the national plan if that emerges.

[ctt1wbw]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Yeap you're a free-thinking maverick, you are

Yeah, that proved Global Warming.

[ctt1wbw]

Still waiting.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Still waiting.

As a trained and schooled scientist, you're obviously qualified to interpret scientific studies and experimental results for yourself, no?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

As a trained and schooled scientist, you're obviously qualified to interpret scientific studies and experimental results for yourself, no?

Like Al Gore?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

As a trained and schooled scientist, you're obviously qualified to interpret scientific studies and experimental results for yourself, no?

And what qualifies YOU, an engineer, to assess if all the global warming scientific studies are really real, and not rigged ?

-t

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

And what qualifies YOU, an engineer, to assess if all the global warming scientific studies are really real, and not rigged ?

-t

Gosh, I sure wish there were some scientists in relevant fields who would comment on the matter.