Michael Giberson Market-based approaches to regulating emissions are the new conventional wisdom, according to Robert Stavins, and it would be hard to disagree. Among proponents of regulating greenhouse gasses in the United States, the big debate is over which of two market-based approaches to regulating emissions should be pursued: emission tax or cap-and-trade. Is anyone … More A problem with market-based approaches to emission reductions
Michael Giberson From Environmental Capital, reports that selling all greenhouse gas emission permits under a cap-and-trade scheme may not be politically attractive: Europe already saw what happened when it gave away emissions permits—utilities gobbled up more than 100 billion euros in windfall profits. The pain for the consumer—i.e., the voter–will be the same whether the … More Cap-and-trade and politics
Michael Giberson Carbon tax and cap-and-trade fun, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and bloggers at Common Tragedies. In brief: on Monday the WSJ lead editorial complained about the distributional effects of cap-and-trade, correctly noting that the effect of pricing carbon would depend on consumption but misleadingly illustrated with a chart based on … More Because it is not news until it is on Comedy Central; or, carbon taxes their brains
Falling permit prices mean that the cost of reducing carbon emissions is going down. If reducing carbon emissions is a worthy public policy goal, then attaining that goal is becoming cheaper. … More Falling carbon permit prices in Europe: Threat or menace?
Comments on comparing cap-and-trade and carbon taxes as ways to regulated greenhouse gases. … More Carbon tax vs. cap-and-trade, again