Feb 10, 2009

Who paid off the WRI?

In this recent post from World Resources Institute preisdent Jonathan Lash he debates the merits of a carbon tax or a cap and trade system as the centerpiece of federal legislation to reduce emissions that fuel global warming.
Here are some highlights from his posty at mongabay.com
Q: WRI supports a cap and trade program over a carbon tax with the objective of federal climate legislation to control emissions of greenhouse gases that require Congress to put a price on carbon using one of two options: by mandating a specific price on carbon, via a tax... WRI therefore believes the most effective way to control greenhouse gases is through a cap and trade mechanism...
All of the solutions for 'climate change' and 'peak energy' are both PROFITABLE and sustainable. A 'green' market SHOULD be driven by market investors utilizing EROI financial models and not the 'trading of credits for finite resources of third world countries who do not know any better than to trade these resources for the basic commodities for survival'
Yet these greenwashing greed driven markets push unsustainable solutions to make the holy dollar on the backs of theses nations that have always suffered and will soon suffer on biblical levels as they rob these nations of the last of their finite natural resources.
The reason big industry is 'pushing for a cap and trade' is that gain more by the control over manipulating markets than escaping taxes.
As OECD countries begin to tax their own economies by charging growing fees on CO2 emissions, their their trading partners will diminish rapidly.... killing the GDP of those countries whose supply chains depend on OECD countries.
FACT: Developing World - Principal Source of Emissions.
Total global emissions have risen by a cumulative 25% since the beginning of the decade. But only a small fraction of those emissions came from North America, Western Europe and OECD economies. In fact, emissions in the most advanced economies of the world have grown by a paltry 5%, one-tenth the 50% increase seen of the developing world. This completey removes the aurguemnt of cap and trade measures being 'the most effective way to control greenhouse gases is through a cap and trade mechanism'.
Who and what are we controlling and why?
I would agree that the taxing of high carbon unsustainable commodities is a strong tool to fight for longterm conservation and sustainable communities... but blanket taxing the resources that economically sustain basic energy, health and infrastructure to non-OECD nations will only continue a sustainable economy for coffin makers.
Trading markets for 'co2' and 'carbon' ideas of clean coal, biofuel harvested from rainforest's and food pools?
Seriously, these are the same people who brought you the pet rock and bottled energy water.
I don't feel sorry for the gullible until they invest the future of others on magic beans.
Here are just a few supporting posts the World Resources Institute needs to read and understand.
The economic impacts of S. 2191,  summarized from IER