Slog - Comments on As for Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles's CO2 Emissions Bill. Well... http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi In my post below about Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles's cool bill to bust businesses and illegal immigrants that are flouting work rules, Will comments: Jeanne always does cool stuff. When you going to cover her emissions bill? Will, I already covered Kohl-Welles' emissions bill. Here's what I said: It’s an okay idea, but it seems a bit timid in that it’s voluntary. Moreover, while there may be an economic incentive for companies to reduce, there may be a stronger economic incentive to pump out more CO2. After all, the more coal, natural gas, or whatever fossil fuels a given utility burns—the... Copyright 2008 Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:41:18 -0800 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:21:01 -0800 http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Comment by Will in Seattle The way companion bills work is someone does something in the House (a Senator) and another one does something in the Senate (a Rep), then they gut both and fill them in. Having a title move thru committee is more important than what it says at first.

And having a leadership name is more important than a backbencher name.

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c629347 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c629347 News Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:59:26 -0800 Comment by Will in Seattle sorry, I flipped House and Senate int he above - my bad.

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c629351 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c629351 News Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:00:13 -0800 Comment by cressona The Grist piece is remarkably misleading: Then Congress would have a whole new pot of subsidy money to pass out to industry. Would you trust them to give it the right companies?

I'd be hard-pressed to name anyone seriously advocating for a carbon tax who is looking at the revenues at a pot of money to use as favors. Al Gore advocates offsetting a carbon tax with a cut in wage taxes. The New York Times columnists who have supported a carbon tax haven't spoken of the proceeds as a new revenue stream that can be spent away either.

More Grist: Subsidizing one or two targeted technologies with a carbon tax would discourage investment in others that may turn out to be more effective... History has shown that the marketplace does a better job of developing new technologies, and a tax takes money out of the marketplace.

This is a weird jujitsu. The whole point of a carbon tax is to let the marketplace decide -- to just stay out of choosing one or two particular technologies to subsidize. Well, if John Kerry can get Swift-boated into appearing to be a war coward, then I guess a carbon tax can get Swift-boated and the reasons for it can be used as reasons against it. Never underestimate the chutzpah factor in American politics.

For those of you who want something other than misrepresentations: http://www.carbontax.org/

]]> cressona http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c629391 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c629391 News Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:30:14 -0800 Comment by Jake of 8bitjoystick.com It is almost halfway through the legislative session and The Stranger has yet to say DIDDLEY SQUAT against the god damn NASCAR track that YOUR Legislators are trying to shove up Kitsap's ass.

]]> Jake of 8bitjoystick.com http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c630219 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c630219 News Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:41:50 -0800 Comment by Andrew Hitchcock I wrote about a cap-and-trade system a few days ago and why it is definitely the best idea:

http://liberalechochamber.blogspot.com/2007/02/most-efficient-solution-to-climate.html

Cap-and-trade targets the low hanging fruit in any sector. With cap-and-trade, there is incentive to reduce emissions from the easiest sector first. If they are under their allocated cap, then they can sell that to someone else, for whom buying credits is cheaper than trying to offset emissions. It is really difficult to reduce emissions in some areas, so this gets the easier stuff first. As the cap is slowly reduced over the years, the harder stuff is slowly taken care of. This allows technology to develop to help the harder sectors without unduly punishing them.

Either way, it is still better than subsidizing corn farmers and ethanol companies.

]]> Andrew Hitchcock http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c630251 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c630251 News Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:12:15 -0800 Comment by Will in Seattle or we could just get rid of the Iowa straw poll and early primary and instead have a real state vote - that would kill the subsidies quickly.

]]> Will in Seattle http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c630313 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/as_for_sen_jeanne_kohlwelless_co2_emissi#c630313 News Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:21:01 -0800