" It should be noted for credibility that the two "articles" she quotes are from the opinion section from Republican writers and not necessarily the opinion of the Newspapers. "

" Do your homework and see who will get wealthy (wealthier, actually) from the creation of a carbon credit market and then look at the crushing burden
this legislation will put on the back of the average American.
It's unconscionable. Especially considering the politicized science that all of cap and trade rests on. "

" The correct policy is really very simple, but won't be open to people in the financial markets making money off it, which is why it is not popular:

Cap and Dividend:

What is it?

Cap and dividend is a simple, market-based way to reduce CO2 emissions without reducing household incomes. It caps fossil fuel supplies, makes polluters pay, and returns the revenue to everyone equally.

Cut.

Cap and dividend starts with a descending economy-wide cap on carbon suppliers rather than carbon emitters. The way the cap works is extremely important.

There are two possible places to cap carbon: (1) where CO2 leaves the economy and enters the atmosphere, and (2) where carbon enters the economy in the form of a fossil fuel. Economists call the former a downstream cap and the latter an upstream cap.

cut.

By contrast, capping carbon as it enters the economy is relatively simple. The cap can be administered by requiring the first sellers of oil, coal and natural gas to buy permits equal to the carbon content of their fuels. Once a year the companies would ‘true up’ and pay a stiff penalty if they don’t own enough permits. No other businesses would need permits, and no smokestacks would need to be monitored.

http://www.capanddividend.org/ "

" With all of this economic damage being done in the name of green jobs and carbon dioxide pollution.

What is a green job? Where will millions of green jobs come from?

Man-produced carbon dioxide affecting our climate is losing credibility in the community of scientists as more studies come out.

Watch the comments to this letter attack the Wall Street Journal, Herigate Foundation, and Washington Times and not the facts. "

" Russ - "Man-produced carbon dioxide affecting our climate is losing credibility in the community of scientists as more studies come out."

Please provide your facts to back up what you wrote is true.

Look forward to reading them. "

" Cap and trade….is just another silly liberal scam to raise revenue…..as the planet cools no less….

Remember…these are the same minds that ruined Freddie and Fannie….continue to force our dependence on foreign energy, continue to oppose nuclear powers, continue to oppose clean coal……CONTINUE TO RUIN WHAT THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT…. "

" If cap and trade is passed the cost of gas, natural gas, electricity and other energy resources will skyrocket. Consumer goods and cap and trade taxes will kill the economy. The Spanish government conducted a survey last year of the effectiveness of "green technology" as it related to the creation of new "green jobs". The results showed that for every "green job" created, 9 jobs were lost.

Cap and trade is just another way for the rich to get richer trading carbon credits. Al Gore is heavily invested in the carbon trading business owning shares of a brokerage house in England. Why do you think he produced the movie An Inconvenient Truth which is based on scientific untruths? Is he really interested in saving the planet from "Global Warming" or is he interested in lining his pockets? Hey, if your interested surf the net an see who has the most energy efficient home, George Bush or Al Gore? The results will shock you. "

" Yeah BH, the Saudis are REALLY going to buy your "permits" in order to pump their own oil out of their own ground.

Where do you Libs come up with this stuff... "

" bauhaus--

What happens when you cap supplies of anything?

Increasing costs of fuel, as we know from very recent history, increases prices on just about every other commodity and fuel itself.

Which effectively (and in some cases actually directly) decreases household incomes. "

" The earth has been warming and cooling for billions of years, and now the guilt stricken looney left feels they can control this cycle with outrageous legislation.
Yes, BH, there is plenty of credible data that refutes the liberal theory of manmade global warming (or as they are now referring to as Climate Change). Are your sources of info so narrow minded that differing views are not presented, or might this just be a “convenient” omission? "

" CO2 is not a pollutant. That's the biggest scam of all. "

" Obama being elected is the poster child for a serious sickness in this country. Makes me wonder if terrorists put something in our water. Obama can apparently do no wrong, and that's what the cult followers of Jim Jones thought too when they drank the KoolAid. Think about it. "

" Bauhaus, following up on your question about scientific studies, start with the report which was suppressed by the Obama EPA.

" Russ - "Man-produced carbon dioxide affecting our climate is losing credibility in the community of scientists as more studies come out."

Please provide your facts to back up what you wrote is true.

Look forward to reading them. "

Here is the study.
http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf

Here is the story on suppr4ession.
http://www.switched.com/2009/07/02/epa-may-have-suppressed-anti-global-warming-study/

I can fill your inbox with links to studies. Read the following article and follow the references to other studies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

Numerous scientists in the field who disagree are referenced.

Do you have contradictory studies? "

" Bauhausfan-

Perhaps you can explain to us all the difference between "Man-Made" CO2 and natural CO2 and the relationship of that gas as 0.0038% of the Atmoshere?

Then you can explain why water vapor, 95% of the CO2 in the atmosphere, is not part of any of the discussion when it comes to CO2 levels.

Additionally, there is the EPA Report, that was suppressed, showing that the "Man-Made=CO2" relationship is a hoax and a scam. Without adequate fuels to replace what will be destroyed by our Central Authoritarian Government, we will not have the energy to run EV's, our hoimes, schools, hospitals, mass transit...etc.

Nothing like NOT having a plan. It is especially interesting to see one of our own Senators (Feinstein) working against solar power.

1.5 Trillion in new taxes is all it is. It has not worked anywhere on the globe and is another leftest scam! "

" that report, freeport shows the CO2 levels are rising .... and cowboy, CO2 in sufficient levels is a pollutant

as for the article, there is this lil tidbit..

A grain of salt is required however, since Carlin (author of the report) is also the man who postulated that managing sea levels and solar radiation would be more effective and less expensive than regulating carbon dioxide emissions.

and there is this from the EPA on why the draft report was not used...

The EPA defended itself, telling CNET that it listened to Carlin's claims, had doubts about his qualifications, going on to say:

"The individual in question is not a scientist and was not part of the working group dealing with this issue. Nevertheless, the document he submitted was reviewed by his peers and agency scientists, and information from that report was submitted by his manager to those responsible for developing the proposed endangerment finding. In fact, some ideas from that document are included and addressed in the endangerment finding."

and this from the authors of the switched article..

".... it seems a tad far-fetched that it is more expensive to tell a company to stop pumping so much CO2 into the air than it is to find a way to artificially control the amount of radiation that enters our planet's atmosphere." "

" A)The notion that you can tax energy producers through cap and trade and not have that effect the consumer negatively is an absolute myth the leftists are sharing amongst themselves. We know better.
B) The notion of anthropogenic global warming is starting to wear thin as the science catches up to the propaganda.
Geologic and ice core records that go back thousands of years show these natural cycles that the watermelon crowd (green on the outside, red on the inside) has interpreted as man caused global catastrophe. The mass hysteria of global warming is indeed madness.
Cap and trade, therefore, is too. "

" Citing the Heritage Foundation as a source negates the validity of this letter. I wouldn't believe any study they carried out. Just my opinion.... "

" alcuawnza

" Citing the Heritage Foundation as a source negates the validity of this letter. I wouldn't believe any study they carried out. Just my opinion.... "

why?

Just as I predicted above. At5tack the messenger, not counter the message. why? Liberal pap. "

" raven,
Here are Dr. Carlin's credentials. Why is he not worth listening to? Politics!

Ph.D., Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA

B.S., Physics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA

His website.
http://carlineconomics.googlepages.com/ "

" Just remember everyone, cap and trade is comming from the party that wants to PUNISH you with a fee for not haveing health insurance. Nough said! "

" alucawanza wrote on Jul 4, 2009 8:56 PM:

" Citing the Heritage Foundation as a source negates the validity of this letter. I wouldn't believe any study they carried out. Just my opinion.... "

But you sill blindly follow the likes of Michael Moore and Al Gore without question? These are men that are only looking out for their own interests. "

" Heritage Foundation is much too intellectual for the jingo left.... "

" When Carlin is a proponent of ..." managing sea levels and solar radiation would be more effective and less expensive than regulating carbon dioxide emissions', it does make me question his abilities and when his paper undergoes peer review and is rejected...that says a lot as well. "

" Raven, I can't find the reference to Carlin suggesting "managing the sea levels and solar radiation." I would like to see his exact words. Sounds looney. Link please. Thanks. "

" Bauhaus, Raven, alucawanza and others,

More scientific studies and lists and names of American scientists who deny AGW.

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Here is a link to the comprehensive study
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

Here are the conclusions.
CONCLUSIONS
There are no experimental data to support the hypothesis that increases in human hydrocarbon use or in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing or can be expected to cause unfavorable changes in global temperatures, weather, or landscape. There is no reason to limit human production of CO2, CH4, and other minor greenhouse gases as has been proposed (82,83,97,123).

This site was #1 when I Google searched "CO2 causing warming." Tell me now what would disqualify this study. This seems definitive. "

" it is at his web site...carlineconomics.googlepages.com/whyadifferent

and being number one doesn't mean a lot....type in the phrase 'carlin managing the sea levels and solar radiation' and see what the first entry is.....this thread came up as number one when I did the search...

That report has been repudiated by so many peer-reviews and organizations that it is almost funny to see you bring it up, authored by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine and Arthur Robinson. "

" cei.org to read the report thge Obama Admin did not want us to see.


Raven- bad news buddy. the poles and greenland are not melting. The ice is stable. "

" Plants eat CO2. They find it to be delicious. After they have ingested it they give off oxygen. It would seem there are better, more nature friendly ways of dealing with the bi-products of combustion other than to tax those who create it (all of us). Didn't some very astute person suggest replanting the rain forests? Now there's an idea worth considering. "

" is it really according to whom freeport...cei?..of course the people that actually have been measuring the caps appear to disagree with you..here is their findings relaesed in February after at wo year study..

Icecaps around the North and South Poles are melting faster and in a more widespread manner than expected, raising sea levels and fueling climate change, a major scientific survey showed Wednesday.

The International Polar Year (IPY) survey found that warming in the Antarctic is "much more widespread than was thought," while Arctic sea ice is diminishing and the melting of Greenland's ice cover is accelerating.

Rising sea levels and changes in ocean temperatures triggered by the melting ice also heralded shifts in weather patterns worldwide and potentially more coastal storm surges, scientists said.

"We're beginning to get hints of change in ocean circulation, that'll have a dramatic impact on the global climate system," IPY director David Carlson told journalists.

The frozen and often inaccessible polar regions have long been regarded as some of the most sensitive barometers of environmental change and global warming because of their influence on the world's oceans and atmosphere.

Preliminary findings from the two year survey by thousands of scientists revealed new evidence that the ocean around the Antarctic has warmed more rapidly than the global average, the World Meteorological Organisation and the International Council for Science said in a statement. (AP 2/23/09)

as for planting more trees...good idea but we keep cutting them down faster than the planting "

" I have been trying to find where the cap and tax bill does anything to promote hydro and/or nuclear power; two sources of engery that produce no green house gases.

As far as I can tell the bill does nothing to promote either and actually is detrimental to them, disqualifying them as renewable resources.

More proof that the bill's intent has nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with raising taxes. "

" Cap and Tax is purely a political solution. Not an economical solution. Far from it. It seizes upon an unproven premise with the presumption that the remedy is manifest when it is actually an unknown. Must we do something to reduce pollutants into our atmosphere? Of course - absolutely. But let's not set up a tax program that operates like a shell game just for the revenue. That would be stupid. The major polluters will simply buy credits and continue polluting at the same rate as before and all of us will end up paying the bill. "

" i wish everyone would read those links that prove at the very least that there is a debate. it isn't settled among all scientists.
it's not about right vs. left either.
was ken lay a leftist ? he and al gore , enron, investment banks and b.p. thought this up years ago.
a carbon tax under the name of cap and trade will be another big transfer of wealth from the middle class , poor, and even many "rich" people, to the super-rich.
al gore stands to make a billion on the deal. will he then suggest we impose leftist ideas like a 90% income tax on those making over 10 million a year or so , the way it used to be in the leftist eisenhower era ?
look up the word liberal in a few dictionaries and you will see that one definition is to have an open mind that examines both sides of an argument. any liberal will look at the great global warming hoax on you tube and then admit that some highly qualified experts take exception to the theory . so there is a debate despite what some say.
the energy companies sponsor many anti-gw sites but it is not well known that some oil companies also sponsor the pro , and play it up in their advertisements . read a b.p. ad sometime. they go on about climate change and how they support the idea of carbon taxes . "

" The economic reality is simple:

Conventional sources of energy are far more efficient (less expensive) than solar and wind. Nuclear energy is the most efficient of all - but that is another discussion.

By taxing conventional energy, cap and trade simply makes conventional energy more expensive than the less efficient alternatives. The ironic idiocy of this is that it removes incentives to making solar and wind more efficient. It simply supports the inefficient.

The net result is enormous economic waste of labor and natural resources, crippling inflation, and a massive reduction in the energy used for enriching human lives.

That is, of course unless one lives in China, India or Russia, in which case the price of conventional energy drops and these economies blow past the United States in a few short years.

Obama: what a great leader... :( "