On 9/6/07, raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/5/07, Gar Lipow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/9/4/212459/4031 > > > > Barnes took that policy insight and asked, if there is only so much > > Thanks for a very nice review. It is disappointing that this book > should do such a good job of identifying the dysfunctions of > capitalism and then offer such lame remedies. How is the above > "emission permits" any different from "carbon offsets"? Does Barnes > really believe corporations will not game this system for profit just > like they have done with everything else?
Well Barnes is a retired corporate CEO who built his life around trying to make corporations play nice. It would be too much to expect of him that in his old age he would reject capitalism. But auctioned permits are not like offsets. Really they are more like a carbon tax. You have a certain number of permits with a limited lifespan, issued in shrinking numbers each year. They are purchased at auction for the the extraction or importation of fossil fuels, or alternatively when they are refined or processed. The price of these permits gets then gets passed along to to immerdiate users, and ultimately to consumers in the form of higher priced fuel, and higher priced goods and services as well, since all goods and services make some use of fossil fuels.They are not given away as corporate gifts, and being levied upstream are much harder to game than offsets. But you avoid regressivity because the money is returned to consumers; you still have the incentive because you are still paying the higher prices, so if you don't conserve, you don't hold to that check; but if you can reduce energy use, then you can do better than break even.
