Skip to main content

House Panel Backs Mandatory Emissions Cap

From Greenwire (subscription required):
The influential House Appropriations Committee went on record this afternoon in support of addressing global warming through a mandatory cap on U.S. emissions. The Republican-led panel accepted a nonbinding climate change amendment that endorses capping greenhouse gas emissions as long as the program does not harm the U.S. economy. The amendment also requires participation from international trading partners.
More later...

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Starvid, Sweden said…
Whatever you do, don't implement an emissions trading system like we have in the EU. It only creates more volatility in power prices. If you do, make sure pollution rights are auctioned, not handed out.

Anyway, a federal CO2 tax is a lot smarter than emission trading. Less bureacracy and less volatility. And it makes it possible to tax gasoline too.

The money should go directly to the elimination of payroll taxes, so that the government does not become needlessly big, and also to compensate the poor for Buschco's unjust tax breaks for the rich.

------------------------------------

Or you could go absolutely French, volontariste, dirigiste, statist and use the money for 300 new state owned nuclear reactors, a continent spanning power grid and a massive TGV railroad system. :) :) :)
Paul Primavera said…
Starvid,

The issue of the tax cuts supported by President Bush is not all black and white. An interesting discussion on this was broadcast on the Diane Rehm Show on National Public Radio earlier today:

< http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/ >

The Cato Institute has some really good studies of taxation in the US:

Tax Policy
< http://www.cato.org/fiscal/tax-policy.html >

Corporate Welfare
< http://www.cato.org/fiscal/corporate-welfare.html >

Federal Budget Policy
< http://www.cato.org/fiscal/budget-policy.html >

I think, however, that we can agree that the "borrow and spend" policy of the neo-conservatives is as injurious (if not more so) to long term American economic health as the the "tax and spend" policies of the liberal democrats.

If we borrow much more, then there will be nothing left for "300 new state owned nuclear reactors, a continent spanning power grid and a massive TGV railroad system"

:( :( :(

Seriously, though, at least in the US, private industry generally runs nukes a lot better than the govt. I used to work at a nuke owned and operated by NYPA, the state power organization for New York State. Then the plant got bought by Entergy. As a corporation, Entergy (ETR) is able to run a nuke a lot better than NYPA was (our capacity factor is a heck of a lot better under ETR than NYPA) - I have lived through it [and I still remain mgt's biggest critic - a happy sailor is a whining sailor!].

Lastly, what I have found amusing in a perverse sort of way is that if we had spend on new nukes what we have already spent in Iraq, then we would now be well on our way to energy independence and could thus let the Islamic fascists drown in their own oil.

Popular posts from this blog

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…