On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 2:31 PM, ehrbar <[email protected]> wrote: > > What shall we do about the dilution of Waxman-Markey that is going on > before our eyes? Here is my answer. Waxman-Markey will not be an
I'm in the midst of writing a post on why Waxman-Markey is much worse than it appears. Here is a three line summary of something that will come in more detail1) ALL the offsets are the bad kind, though each is bad in its own special way. In spite of Romm, you can subtract 100% of offsets from the reduction size. 2) Various factors in the size and structure of the permits given away reduce the effectiveness. Increased risk of non-compliance with caps. 3) The downstream sectorial nature of the caps leave more room for evasion and also build political infrastructure for pushback against attempt at future modifications that tighten the billl The argument for Waxman-Markey would be that it gets us started on cuts, and that it puts in place infrastructure that we can then add tighter cuts to. But various flaws mean essentially zero cuts in the short term. And infrastructure is political as well as physical. Waxman-Markey helps create and increase the political infrastructure for avoiding cuts down the road. Sorry about posting this without analysis or evidence. That will follow. But I wanted to give people a heads up that there serious reasons to believe Waxman-Markey a net negative for the climate. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
