This post was written by Matt McDermott for Planet Greet, and a follow up to a post earlier this week on the differing impact of Cap and Trade on socio-economic classes.
In practice a cap and trade program for carbon emissions is a pretty
complex thing, no doubt about it. It also can seem like a pretty wonky
concept for the average person to pay much attention to. If fairly recent public polls are anything to go on, most Americans haven't the foggiest idea of what all the fuss is about.
With that in mind, and in light of President Obama's speech from the Oval Office last night, here's the most simple cap and trade definition I can give:
In structuring the program you have to determine how big a polluter is before they are required to participate. Ideally you want to include all the big polluters, to stem pollution at the source, rather than micro-managing smaller industry and individuals.
The idea is to set the initial allotment slightly below what's already being emitted -- the whole point of this is to reduce the amount of pollution, not just keep it at current levels.
See, that wasn't so complex.
Keep in mind that cap and trade is just one policy mechanism available for reducing carbon emissions, even if it's the most popular one at the moment (even not being that popular with polluting industries and their Congressional supporters). Alternatives to cap and trade: A carbon tax or a cap and dividend program—each has some high-profile supporters.
More on Cap and Trade from Planet Green:
A Cap and Trade System Could Save US Families $900 a Year
Cap and Trade Explained in Under Four Minutes (Video)
Cap and Trade Won't Break the Bank: Climate Bill Would Actually Cut US Budget Deficit
Hansen Was Right: Cap and Trade Isn't the Solution
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on LinkedIn