GraniteGeek

GraniteGeek http://www.area603.com/index.php?blogId=6 DavidBrooks 2009-08-22T19:33:11Z Carbon tax, not cap-and-trade, in Canada http://www.area603.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2193&blogId=6 Many economists, but not all, say that a straightforward carbon tax would be a better way of reducing greenhouse emissions than a cap-and-trade system, because there's less room for political wiggling and businesses know the cost of their pollution more easily. North America will get a little test of that debate soon: British Columbia is <a href="http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/carbon-tax-debuts-in-canada-1062.html">starting a tax next week</a>; we and the rest of the Northeast will start the <a href="http://www.rggi.org/">cap-and-trade system RGGI</a> in September. <a href="http://www.pewclimate.org/press_room/opinion_editorials/oped_miamih07122007">Here's an argument</a> that cap-and-trade is better, from the Pew Center.<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/02/us/politics/04web-redburn.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1214652053-rB8nCH4PGFjrGj546prV+w">Here's an argument</a> that carbon taxes are better, from the N.Y. Times Sustainability 2008-06-28T07:13:28Z DavidBrooks Nuclear power - too expensive to matter? http://www.area603.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2124&blogId=6 Nobody's ever going to build the second <a href="http://www.fpl.com/environment/nuclear/about_seabrook_station.shtml">Seabrook</a> unit that was once evisioned, but the <a href="http://www.area603.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2113&blogId=6">debate at Vermont Yankee</a> shows that renewed interest in nuclear power prodded by climate change exists even here in New England. Salon has an <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/06/02/nuclear_power_price/">an interesting negative take on nukes</a>, concentrating on the difficult economics on these massive plants. <a href="http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071128/COLUMNISTS03/311280070/-1/columnists">Here's a column I wrote last fall</a> after a largely anti-nuke conference in Concord, emphasizing a contrarian's opinion that nuclear was the least of many evils. Energy 2008-06-02T08:43:39Z DavidBrooks Money for alternative energy or to hold down electric rates? http://www.area603.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2069&blogId=6 <a></a><a type="image/jpeg" href="http://www.area603.com/resserver.php?blogId=6&resource=northeast%20states%20pic%20%28RGGI%29.jpg" id="res_527" class="nodecoration"><img border="0" src="http://www.area603.com/resserver.php?blogId=6&resource=northeast%20states%20pic%20%28RGGI%29.jpg&mode=preview" style="margin: 5px;" class="res_image_small" /></a>The big question left to answer as New Hampshire gets ready to (almost certainly) join the 10-state <a>Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative</a> is how much of the funds that are generated from producers (e.g., generated from rate-payers like us) should go toward conservation, and how much should go to reducing the expected jump in electric rates. A boring detail, but exactly the sort of "political" issue that has to be settled before real alternatives to fossil-fuel energy can be developed. Here is <a href="http://www.nhbr.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080509/NEWS06/844264928">Bob Sanders' most recent take</a> at New Hampshire Business Review. Sustainability 2008-05-09T11:37:12Z DavidBrooks RGGI vote coming http://www.area603.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2063&blogId=6 <a href="http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=State+Senate+to+vote+on+emissions+bill&articleId=7c9d6a36-2603-4e42-be8c-48de1f76fb17">This Union-Leader article</a>, presenting the business world's fears that the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative will raise costs and hurt them, sounds like an echo from a few years ago, when "tree-hugger" was still an insult. It's good to be reminded that pollution fighting carries pain, though. Greenhouse gas 2008-05-07T08:08:45Z DavidBrooks Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative - a great explanation http://www.area603.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2060&blogId=6 <a type="image/jpeg" href="http://www.area603.com/resserver.php?blogId=6&resource=northeast%20states%20pic%20(RGGI).jpg" id="res_527" class="nodecoration"><img border="0" src="http://www.area603.com/resserver.php?blogId=6&resource=northeast%20states%20pic%20(RGGI).jpg&mode=preview" style="margin: 5px;" class="res_image_small" /></a>CNet's excellent Green Tech blog <a href="http://www.news.com/greentech/?tag=nefd.lede">has a piece </a>about the company whose software will be used for the carbon-trading details when the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative launches Sept. 10, which gives it a great excuse to explain the whole cap-and-trade system very nicely. (New Hampshire is likely to join this 10-state initiative, although the state Senate hasn't yet given its OK.)From the piece:The copany is trying to get a grip on the logistics of getting 250 emitters to participate in a quarterly auction without too many glitches. "Herding the cats is job No. 1," (an official) said. "Job No. 2 is making sure that nobody gets their nose out of joint because he's looking for one misstep as an excuse to sue somebody." And here's a Cliff Notes version of cap-and-trade:"The way a carbon cap-and-trade system works is that participants have to purchase allowances that allow them to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide. These allowances can be bought and sold. So if a power generator buys the right to emit 40 million tons of carbon, but manages to fall under that threshold, the company can sell those credits to a power generator that has gone over their ceiling. In the RGGI scheme, polluters will buy these allowances once a quarter and will base their purchases on what sort of weather they anticipate and kind of fuels they use." Sustainability 2008-05-06T08:33:52Z DavidBrooks