We've Already Done Cap/Trade Successfully. With Sulfuric Acid. So Naysayers Are Just Ignorant.

[KittyWampus]

Krugman was on the radio explaining why Cap/Trade will work and gave an example of a successful example we've already done- sulfuric acid.

We've already done Cap/Trade on sulfuric acid and have successfully reduced acid rain in the US with little negative economic impact.

He also mentioned Fishing Licenses. Along those lines, where I live there are limited number of deer hunting licenses that hunters have to sign up for.

[Oregone]

1. Did that system allow offset purchases?

Also, what was the consequences of exceeding one's carbon credits (was it merely paying double?)?

[karynnj]

6. You can't have cap and TRADE without being able to do so

The main reason it works is that it gives a real cost to the emissions. The higher that cost, the more a company would be willing to pay for better technology to reduce it. It becomes a straight forward economic decision.

[Oregone]

7. I don't get it. Trading "carbon credits" is different than purchasing "carbon offsets"

The offset component is entirely separate and in addition to the main cap and trade mechanism which works on its own (it turns "carbon credits" into a scarce commodity that limits emissions and acts upon companies to innovate by making emission producing manufacturing expensive). Offsets state you can pollute beyond your "carbon credits" (you been given or traded for) without penalty if you invest in an external offset company that is suppose to research technology to reduce emissions. You say it becomes a simply economic decisions, but this isn't exactly the case if the offset company has the same shareholders as the company making the offset purchases (nor is it the end goal, which is to reduce emissions across the board). If the ability to buy offsets doesn't actually create an emissions wash by reducing pollution, then it is counter productive to the real goal of cutting GHG.

Between the loophole of buying offsets, and simply penalizing violators with twice the cost of a carbon credit, it significantly hampers the natural market forces a cap and trade system has to produce innovation.

If the sulfuric acid cap and trade system did not allow polluting companies the loopholes of buying "offsets" (instead of limited credits), then it is not comparable to this

[iconocrastic]

8. It's not a real cost, it's arbitrary based on a rationing system

There's no demonstrated "cost of carbon"

Human being exhale carbon-dioxide.

Plants need carbon dioxide to live.

Reduce carbon dioxide and plants will thin out.

This ain't rocket science.

[karynnj]

9. As far as the business man making a decision, it is real

The fact is that there is too much man made carbon. As to plants needing it, that is why one recommended thing is planting more trees. Unless you prefer to believe Senator Inhofe, the leader of the flat earth caucus.

[BlooInBloo]

2. They're not ignorant. They just follow whatever Messiah Kucinich says.

[Peacetrain]

3. I do not understand why our own

are using Boehners talking points?

[vaberella]

5. Have you seen some of these threads?! It's disturbing how much Rethug crap is around. n/t

[Peacetrain]

10. No Kidding.. just when you think it could not get any worse..bingo a new one pops up

[lindisfarne]

4. Krugman also mentioned that sulfuric acid cap/trade was on a much smaller level, and cautioned that

scaling up with carbon could turn out to be more difficult. Not that he was against cap/trade - just said it would be more difficult with carbon.