Does an emissions trading scheme lower global warming?
Posted on December 9th, 2009 by admin
The Australian Government tried to get one passed, but was thrown out by the senate.
It is just a clever way of putting a huge TAX on everything to try and balance their buget.
Why should the less well off have to suffer by paying more for power food just because of all the hot air coming out of Canberra.
It has worked in the past for sulfur emissions, so we have no reason to doubt it will work for carbon.
December 9th, 2009 at 5:48 am
Those who stand to make billions of dollars from it will tell you it’s working.
References :
December 9th, 2009 at 6:10 am
It has worked in the past for sulfur emissions, so we have no reason to doubt it will work for carbon.
References :
December 9th, 2009 at 6:47 am
Yes it does. As said by 1 of the previous answers, it has worked in the past for sulfur emissions, so we have no reason to doubt it will work for carbon. ET scheme works because it discourages emissions above set target and encourages emissions below target.
Read more on Emissions Trading at:
http://www.environbusiness.com/CChange/ETM.html
References :
December 9th, 2009 at 7:25 am
watch the new video at thestoryofstuff.com
References :
December 9th, 2009 at 7:49 am
An emissions trading scheme in this country alone will not lower global warming, simply because Australia’s contribution to global warming is about 1%. Polluters such as China, India and USA need to take drastic measures to lower their pollution levels for there to be any effect. Further, polluters who have higher pollution levels are able to purchase certificates from those in industry who pollute at lower levels and have certificates to trade, in the end there is a negligible difference in pollution. Ultimately, in my humble opinion, the only way to halt, reverse global warming is to use green energy and energy sourced from renewable resources, solar, wind and nuclear. ETS is nothing more than an acronym for Mr KRudd’s "Extra Tax Scheme", he has to in some way recoup all over the money that he’s blown in his term in office so far
References :
December 9th, 2009 at 7:58 am
The effect of an ETS can be variable. It is intended to force emitters to change their practice or develop new Technologies as the costs of emissions increase. There are not many in the world, and the one in the EU was initially a disaster. The Australian version basically did nothing for 3-5 years as so many free permits and exemptions were to be given.
An ETS can only be truly successful, in my opinion, as part of a global scheme, which is itself part of a "Kyoto" type protocol, to which ALL the major emitters belong.
For Australia, I can see a situation where the ‘permit’ to emit from a power station may end up being the operator’s largest single asset, and therefore, they find it more cost effective (ie more profitable) to close the station and sell the permit!!!
References :
December 9th, 2009 at 8:32 am
Keith
Can you tell me any country in the World that reduced sulphur emmissions by a "Cap and Trade" ETS? Sulphur pollution was reduced by regulation, not taxation.
References :