Cap and Trade Cognitive Dissonance 101

Paging Tom Friedman.

There is much in the House cap-and-trade energy bill that just passed that I absolutely hate. It is too weak in key areas and way too complicated in others. A simple, straightforward carbon tax would have made much more sense than this Rube Goldberg contraption. It is pathetic that we couldn’t do better. It is appalling that so much had to be given away to polluters. It stinks. It’s a mess. I detest it.

Now let’s get it passed in the Senate and make it law.

Why? Because, for all its flaws, this bill is the first comprehensive attempt by America to mitigate climate change by putting a price on carbon emissions. Rejecting this bill would have been read in the world as America voting against the reality and urgency of climate change and would have undermined clean energy initiatives everywhere.

So, just because it's the first bill to deal with a problem that might not actually be a problem we have to pass it?

Climate change is a natural part of the global climate since the Earth was created all those eons ago. There were warm periods. There were cold periods. Then, there's the last few hundred years or so when people have been able to take direct measurements of temperature, and the last few decades where satellites can provide global temperature measurements. All of sudden, based on this limited data sample we're told to worry about global warming.

Okay.

We have to stop polluting. I want to see reduced pollution, but the efforts to strangle US business and industry isn't going to affect the global climate, and it surely isn't going to get China or India to suddenly realize that they too have to shut down their polluting industries.

China is the largest emitter of pollution in the world. The air in China is so think you can see it and taste it. Just look at all those photos of Beijing during the Olympics. It was dirty and dingy, despite the government's best efforts to shut tens of thousands of factories and power plants all over China to put the best face on the Chinese Olympic effort. It failed badly, because as soon as the games were over, the government allowed those business to resume their pollution.

Cap and trade is a disastrous policy as all too many countries are already seeing.

If Friedman is so concerned about pollution and cap and trade, how about imploring the New York Times to stop publishing the paper version of its news? After all, think of the trees that could be saved and the forests that could capture all the CO2 that is being emitted.

In fact, Friedman could also shut down his computer and lessen the strain on the power grid, a portion of which requires carbon emissions. He should also give up his trips overseas since the flights release plenty of COx. He should also give up the car.

Instead, he excoriates Republicans, President Obama, and all Americans for why this bill is so poor. Sorry, but that doesn't fly either.

This bill is so awful because it will never do what its authors intend. It will not reduce emissions, will create a new market that can be manipulated in a fashion akin to Enron without suitable regulatory oversight to prevent such manipulation, and will cause shortages of energy all while causing prices of all manner of goods and services to increase as the costs are passed on to consumers.