Ottawa praises three provinces set to introduce cap-and-trade system Last updated on Thursday, Jul. 29, 2010 1:00PM EDT
The federal Conservative government says it is pleased to learn Canada’s three largest provinces are working independently with two U.S. states to introduce a cap-and-trade system that would put a price tag on greenhouse-gas emissions...
It was announced on Tuesday that Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia will join with California and New Mexico, as part of the Western Climate Initiative, to impose a system of caps on large industrial emitters starting as early as January, 2012. Companies that produce more emissions than allowed would be required to buy credits from companies that emit less.
Cap and trade is a license to cheat and steal July 13, 2010
Research indicates that implementation of a U.S. emissions market could drive up energy costs for Americans anywhere from $324 to a whopping $3,100 per year. And because low-income families spend a greater percentage of their earnings on energy, this burden would fall heaviest on those least able to afford it.
In contrast, the financial benefits would be enjoyed by Wall Street opportunists and special-interest groups. The government-regulated trade of carbon dioxide opens the door to the creation of risky financial tools like the derivatives, hedges and credit default swaps that led to our recent economic crisis and the scandals associated with it.
Anyone who doubts this risk need only look at the experience of Europe’s cap-and-trade system. Not only has it been plagued with fraud and abuse, it failed to meet its emissions-reduction targets.
Heard of this wonderful system of Cap and Trade? Here's basically how it works:
1. Set an overall limit on pollutant emissions (the cap). Make sure the cap isn't too ambitious and is susceptible to corporate lobbying. 2. Grant the industries plenty of free licenses to pollute (carbon credits), so they can continue business-as-usual. Biggest polluters get rewarded with most credits. 3. Allow the cap to be raised by additional offset credits and other holes in the system. 4. Pollutant emissions are now made into tradable commodities; A new speculative market is born. 5. Make the whole system as obscure as possible, and assure the general public that the free market will take care of the climate crisis 6. 7. Profit!
The Cap and Trade system (as implemented in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme) has a whole range of issues:
* It's main purpose is not to reduce emissions, but to help polluters meet "reduction" targets in the cheapest way possible, in a business-as-usual scenario. * Leaves room for unverifiable manipulation. * Generates outrageous profits for big industry polluters, investors in fraudulent offset projects, opportunist traders and new 'marketplaces' such as the European Climate Exchange. * It distracts attention from the wider, systemic changes and collective political action that needs to be taken to tackle climate change and its fundamental root causes.
For more in-depth critical reflections on carbon trade, visit Carbon Trade Watch.
The Story of Cap & Trade is a fast-paced, fact-filled look at the leading climate solution being discussed at Copenhagen and on Capitol Hill. Host Annie Leonard introduces the energy traders and Wall Street financiers at the heart of this scheme and reveals the "devils in the details" in current cap and trade proposals: free permits to big polluters, fake offsets and distraction from what’s really required to tackle the climate crisis. If you’ve heard about Cap & Trade, but aren’t sure how it works (or who benefits), this is the film is for you.
Enron Sought Global Warming Regulation, Not Free Markets Georgia Op-Ed in The Roanoke Times By Paul J. Georgia February 02, 2002
It’s not surprising to most people that Enron delivered truckloads of money to politicians in an attempt to influence the political process. What may surprise many, however, is that Enron believed that one of its main opportunities to make money by gaming the political system was global warming.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Enron became one of the biggest corporate boosters of the Kyoto global warming treaty, which would require huge reductions in energy use by consumers and industry. According to an internal Enron memo, quoted by The Washington Post, the Kyoto treaty would “do more to promote Enron’s business than almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States.”
In addition to all its political lobbying and contributions, Enron became a founding member of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change’s Business Environmental Leadership Council, a leading industry front group pushing the Kyoto agenda. Enron chairman Ken Lay also served on the board of the Heinz Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment, along with Fred Krupp of Environmental Defense, and former Alcoa CEO and current Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill.
I don't particularly agree with the climate change denying aspects of this article, but it's an interesting take on Enron and cap & trade. Sulfur dioxide and CO2 as commodities -
How Enron hyped global warming for profit March 16, 2006 Investigate Oct 05, The Kyoto Conspiracy
Not one single day goes by in New Zealand now without a reference somewhere to global warming, and New Zealand’s requirement to comply with the Kyoto protocol. But few people realise that Kyoto was the brainchild of a corrupt multinational energy company, looking to make a buck out of the green movement. KEN RING explains
Amidst the talk about the benefits that Kyoto Protocol is supposed to promote, it is perhaps forgotten especially amongst the greenies how Kyoto was born in the corridors of very big business. The name Enron has all but faded from our news pages since the company went down in flames in 2001 amidst charges of fraud, bribery, price fixing and graft. But without Enron there would have been no Kyoto Protocol.
About 20 years ago Enron was owner and operator of an interstate network of natural gas pipelines, and had transformed itself into a billion-dollar-a-day commodity trader, buying and selling contracts and their derivatives to deliver natural gas, electricity, internet bandwidth, whatever [weather derivativeswww.helium.com/items/181942-weather-derivative-trading-explained ]. The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to put a cap on how much pollutant the operator of a fossil-fueled plant was allowed to emit. In the early 1990s Enron had helped establish the market for, and became the major trader in, EPA’s $20 billion-per-year sulphur dioxide cap-and-trade program, the forerunner of today’s proposed carbon credit trade. This commodity exchange of emission allowances caused Enron’s stock to rapidly rise.
Then came the inevitable question, what next? How about a carbon dioxide cap-and-trade program? The problem was that CO2 is not a pollutant, and therefore the EPA had no authority to cap its emission. Al Gore took office in 1993 and almost immediately became infatuated with the idea of an international environmental regulatory regime. He led a U.S. initiative to review new projects around the world and issue ‘credits’ of so many tons of annual CO2 emission reduction. Under law a tradeable system was required, which was exactly what Enron also wanted because they were already trading pollutant credits. Thence Enron vigorously lobbied Clinton and Congress, seeking EPA regulatory authority over CO2. From 1994 to 1996, the Enron Foundation contributed nearly $1 million dollars - $990,000 - to the Nature Conservancy, whose Climate Change Project promotes global warming theories. Enron philanthropists lavished almost $1.5 million on environmental groups that support international energy controls to “reduce” global warming. Executives at Enron worked closely with the Clinton administration to help create a scaremongering climate science environment because the company believed the treaty could provide it with a monstrous financial windfall. The plan was that once the problem was in place the solution would be trotted out.
A lawyer named Christopher Horner was hired who had worked in Senator Lieberman’s Environment Committee. Horner, employed by Enron, became director of relations with the Federal Government. That was in 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was drafted. According to Homer, on the second day at the job he was told that the Number One Objective was to obtain an international treaty that would impose cuts in CO2 emissions, but at the same time allowed trade with emission rights. Enron had the biggest natural gas production behind Russia’s Gazprom. Enron was making a lot of money trading with coal, but they had already calculated that the profits they would lose with coal would be more than compensated by the profits derived from its privileged position in other areas. With clever positioning and anticipation Enron had bought the world’s biggest wind power company, GE Wind, from General Electric. They now also owned the biggest solar power company in the world, in society with Amoco (now belonging to British Petroleum – BP). Enron then started to finance everything related to the global warming hype, including grants to scientists – but asking for results favorable to their interest – “proof” that humans were responsible for the excessive emissions of CO2 through fossil fuel burning. The fire of malaise, now lit and kindled, only required feeding.
The expressive term ‘Baptist-bootlegger’ derives from the days of prohibition. Under prohibition bootleggers and those who trans-ported and supplied illegal alcohol made fortunes. One such entrepreneur was Joseph Kennedy whose second son, John, became US President in 1961. The bootleggers had allies in the Baptists and other teetotalists, who believed that alcohol was a deadly threat to the social order, and had worked for decades to get prohibition onto the statute books. The Baptists provided the political cover and the bootleggers pocketed the proceeds. In public the two groups maintained a great social distance from each other. Now Enron had positioned itself at the centre of an awesome Baptist-bootlegger coalition. The gargantuan rents which Enron energetically sought could be realized only if the Kyoto Protocol became established as part of US and international law. Ken Lay, Enron’s CEO saw Enron as not only making billions from sales of the natural gas which was to displace coal as the preferred fuel under the Kyoto commitments, but he realised that as the main if not the only international and domestic trader in the new barter world of carbon credits, Enron could realise hitherto unimagined wealth. Such credits, of course, would only become bankable pieces of paper if governments, particularly the US Government, established and policed a global policy of decarbonisation under which a global tax on carbon was to be enforced.
As the movement to establish the Kyoto Protocol developed momentum, it was necessary for Ken Lay to build up alliances with the green movement including Greenpeace. A 1998 letter, signed by Lay and a few other bigwigs asked President Clinton, in essence, to harm the reputations and credibility of scientists who argued that global warming was an overblown issue, because these individuals were standing in Enron’s way. The letter, dated Sept. 1, asked the president to shut off the public scientific debate on global warming, which continues to this date. In particular, it requested Clinton to moderate the political aspects of this discussion by appointing a bipartisan Blue Ribbon Commission. The purpose of this commission was clear – high-level trashing of dissident scientists. Setting up a panel to do this was simple; just look at the recent issue of Scientific American where four attack dogs were called out to chew up Bjorn Lomborg. He had the audacity to publish The Skeptic Environmentalist demonstrating that global warming is overblown. David Bellamy, the world’s foremost environmentalist also stepped out of line with his widely printed article “Global Warming? What a load of old Poppycock.” In the same way Galileo was forced to publicly utter that the moon had no effect on tides, so Bellamy under pressure backtracked on some of his claims.
Enron commissioned its own internal study of global warming science. It turned out to be largely in agreement with the same scientists that Enron was trying to shut up. After considering all of the inconsistencies in climate science, the report concluded: “The very real possibility is that the great climate alarm could be a false alarm. The anthropogenic warming could well be less than thought and favorably distributed.” One of Enron’s major consultants in that study was NASA scientist James Hansen, who started the whole global warming mess in 1988 with his bombastic congressional testimony. Recently he published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences predicting exactly the same inconsequential amount of warming in the next 50 years as the scientists that Enron wanted to gag. They were a decade ahead of NASA. True to its plan, Enron never made its own findings public, self-censoring them while it pleaded with the Bush administration for a cap on carbon dioxide emissions that it could broker. That pleading continues today – the remnant-Enron still views global warming regulation as the straw that will raise it from its corporate oblivion. Some greenie campaigning in America is still directed from this source. On July 7, 2004, Kenneth Lay was indicted by a federal grand jury for his involvement in the scandal.
Everyone knows that a few hundred votes in Florida tipped the election to George W, but few are aware that West Virginia, normally a Democrat stronghold, went for Bush because the coal industry in that state decided to back him because he would not endorse Kyoto. Without West Virginia, the vote in Florida would have made no difference.
”Enron stood to profit millions from global warming energy-trading schemes,” said Mike Carey, president of the Ohio Coal Association and American Coal Coalition. The investigation into the collapse of Enron will reveal much more about the intricacies of the Baptist-bootlegger coalition which was promoting the Kyoto cause within the Republican Party and within US business circles. Coal-burning utilities would have had to pay billions for permits because they emit more CO2 than do natural gas facilities. That would have encouraged closing coal plants in favor of natural gas or other kinds of power plants, driving up prices for those alternatives. Enron, along with other key energy companies in the so-called Clean Power Group – El Paso Corp., NiSource, Trigen Energy, and Calpine – would make money both coming and going – from selling permits and then their own energy at higher prices. If the Kyoto Protocol were ratified and in full force, experts estimated that Americans would lose between $100 billion and $400 billion each year. Additionally, between 1 and 3.5 million jobs could be lost. That means that each household could lose an average of up to $6,000 each year. That is a lot to ask of Americans just so large energy companies can pocket millions from a regulatory scheme. Moreover, a cost of $400 billion annually makes Enron’s current one-time loss of $6 billion look like pocket change. Little wonder Americans and the incoming Bush administration did not want a bar of it.
In NZ the Labour government was forced to agree to the Kyoto Protocol because the Alliance Party self destructed and Labour needed the Greens for support in Confidence and Supply. The cost of that support was agreement to GE legislation and the Kyoto Protocol. Labour could see that the GE debate had no financial return, but the carbon credit trading game looked much more promising. Positive credit-trading with all our trees acting as CO2 sinks made politicians see dollar signs. But just as Enron came unstuck mired in financial ruin and scandal, so too is the Kyoto Protocol set to ruin economies and bring down governments and any players foolish enough to be taken in. Enron collapsed in a quagmire of bribery, misinformation, energy price manipulation and the use of political connections to exert pressure on energy boards. Anything connected to the Kyoto Protocol will turn out to be good money after bad, because a scheme instigated by half-truths and hype must eventually collapse under the weight of the spin of its own cover-up. The half-billion dollar debt NZ now owes could be just the beginning. In 2002 Helen Clark said “Climate change is a global problem ..the Kyoto Protocol is the international community’s response to climate change and New Zealand is playing its part”. This contrasted strongly with Enron’s own internal report expressing doubt that global warming was real. It is hard to accept that Clark does not know that the Protocol only became real through Enron. Real problems are the gullibility of satellite western economies, the dangers of being the tail of giant corporate dogs and the perceived need to appease the EU for trade deals. Global warming itself does not even get a look in. In NZ the only funding for environmental research comes to the NZ Climate Change Office for the Ministry for the Environment and is funded through the Ministry of Fisheries and the Public Good Science & Technology fund. The particular institute concerned has all the appearance of an independent research body whilst at the same time proclaiming to be spokespeople for government policies re the environment. In this way debate is suppressed in NZ, because there is no funding for alternative viewpoints, no panel for review or accountability of government-science agendae and no voice of balance in government-funded public media.
I suggest you look out the window to see if there is any catastrophe happening. While looking, check to see if any ocean is yet rising. Also look up – exactly where is this methane cloud? Please, someone, explain how heavier-than-air car emissions can get 6-8 miles up where weather is generated? We are not all that taken in. Despite all the handwringing and increasingly desperate hysteria, where global warming is concerned there has been a failure to force this paranoid religion onto the world. Since the Rio Conference in 1992, the greens have tried using the threat of global warming to induce Protestant guilt in us all, to cap growth, to change lifestyles, to attack the car, industry and the Great Satan of America. They have lost. Only schoolchildren remain rich fodder willing to believe it is up to them now to Save The World, which hasn’t needed saving one iota during the last 4,000,000,000 years or it wouldn’t still be here. Now it is surely time to face the facts: there isn’t a snowflake-in-hell’s chance of global warming altering real life. But the failure of the greens is not just with the public. While playing the climate-change card at the G8 Summit, the final Gleneagles’ declaration shows that the leaders of the developed world have no intention of sacrificing growth and economic success for an ascetic global warming religion. To quote Michael McCarthy, the environment editor of the Independent: ‘The failed agenda that Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the World Wide Fund for Nature and others were complaining of – that the US has still not agreed to cut its carbon dioxide emissions – was the green groups’ own agenda, not the British government’s. At G8 the idea of capping greenhouse gas emissions was cleverly replaced by an emphasis on technological innovation and imaginative development. The Kyoto Protocol is effectively dead.
In NZ almost the only funding for environmental research is invested in NIWA and comes via the NZ Climate Change Office for the Ministry for the Environment, but mostly funded through the Ministry of Fisheries and the Public Good Science & Technology fund. The institute has all the appearance of an independent research body whilst at the same time acting in the appointed role of spokespeople for government policies on the environment. NIWA is a fine organisation when it comes to marine biological research, but when it comes to climate projection theirs must still be only an opinion. Sadly, though, other opinions that might make for lively debate are somewhat suppressed in NZ, because there is no funding for alternatives, no panel for review or accountability of government-science agendae and subsequently no voice of balance across most government-funded public media.
Consequently the work of NIWA is perceived in some quarters as having become politicised which is sad for an otherwise valuable and necessary national research resource.
Hackers steal 2 million tonnes of EU carbon credits January 20, 2011
Hackers stole two million tonnes of polluting rights in a five-day raid this week on the European Union's carbon emissions trading system, an EU source said on Thursday.
The volume of carbon credits stolen in online action, which a European Commission spokeswoman was "possibly concerted", represents just a fraction of global industrial greenhouse gas permits, but is potentially worth many millions of euros.
Post by hairy eyeball on Apr 27, 2011 20:55:30 GMT -8
And Kock (pronounced "cock" or "cuckoo").
Koch Industries is spending tens of millions to influence every facet of government that could affect its global empire | By John Aloysius Farrell 10:00 am, April 6, 2011
The money that Koch (pronounced “coke”) has spent on lobbying in Washington has soared in recent years, from $857,000 in 2004 to $20 million in 2008. The Kochs then spent another $20.5 million over the next two years to influence federal policy, as the company’s lobbyists and officials sought to mold, gut or kill more than 100 prospective bills or regulations.
Oil is the core of the Koch business empire, and the company’s lobbyists and officials have successfully fought to preserve the industry’s tax breaks and credits, and to defeat attempts by Congress to regulate greenhouse gases.
But Koch’s diversified interests, and thus its lobbying activities, extend far beyond petroleum. Koch companies trade carbon emission credits in Europe and derivatives in the U.S. They make jet fuel in Alaska from North Slope oil, and gasoline in Minnesota from the oil sands of Canada. They raise cattle in Montana and manufacture spandex in China, ethanol in Iowa, fertilizer in Trinidad, nylon in Holland, napkins in France and toilet paper in Wisconsin.
But in this case, the government and the company said the settlers were illegal and evicted for a good cause: to protect the environment and help fight global warming.
The case twists around an emerging multibillion-dollar market trading carbon-credits under the Kyoto Protocol, which contains mechanisms for outsourcing environmental protection to developing nations.
The company involved, New Forests Company, grows forests in African countries with the purpose of selling credits from the carbon-dioxide its trees soak up to polluters abroad. Its investors include the World Bank, through its private investment arm, and the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, HSBC.
In 2005, the Ugandan government granted New Forests a 50-year license to grow pine and eucalyptus forests in three districts, and the company has applied to the United Nations to trade under the mechanism. The company expects that it could earn up to $1.8 million a year.
Carbon program too hazy Wednesday, November 23, 2011
EDMONTON - The province still does not have a bulletproof system in place to monitor and police the system Alberta’s biggest industrial polluters use to reduce their carbon footprints.
On Tuesday, the auditor general’s office said the province’s progress in the past two years on clarifying its carbon offset program has been unsatisfactory, because Alberta still doesn’t test the validity of the offsets companies purchase as a trade-off for producing too much greenhouse gas.
Auditor General Merwan Saher said Tuesday Alberta’s top greenhouse gas emitters buy about $60 million in offsets each year. But with no standard for measuring how those offsets contribute to an overall reduction in carbon emissions, it is possible — though not certain — the province has overstated its success to date.
Deutsche Bank probed in carbon trading tax scam Executives investigated for signing off on tax documents related to emissions business Posted: Dec 12, 2012 12:47 PM ET Last Updated: Dec 12, 2012 12:42 PM ET Under the continent's widening emissions scam, fraudulent traders are alleged to have bought millions of carbon credits outside of Europe (thereby evading strictly monitored EU taxes on them) and then reselling them under the radar, while skimming the tax money off the top. www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/12/12/business-deutsche-bank.html
moabiter: If you log in or register, please check your Profile settings.
Sept 17, 2013 8:24:45 GMT -8
KS Chua: I noticed someone was waiting in the dark for me on my way home tonight. I believe someone is trying to kill me. -kok SeNg chUA
Nov 17, 2013 13:35:49 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: The perps used an acoustic device projecting noise and pretended tobe mafia hitmen and I broke a windshield to get in jail and be safe . I was surgically implanted in New York Long Island's Nassau County jail. Perps hate for you to yell and threaten them.
Dec 13, 2013 18:04:49 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: I have had probes surgically implanted and V2K and nobody helps me because these lowlifes pay everyone off or use counterintelligence to disinform the people who try to help me. The perps are Meriwether from Brunswick, Georgia U.S.A. and a Joe Moody
Dec 13, 2013 18:07:32 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: The money from the torture and murder that these rednecks are getting here in the United States is from the Dept. of Defense's Office off Ssience and Technolgy, the Dept. of Justice Office of Science and Tecnology, the Dept. of Commerce Office of Science
Dec 13, 2013 18:10:43 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: BIuS
Dec 13, 2013 18:11:19 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: dEPT. OF cOMMERCE oFFICE OF sCIENCE AND tECHNOLOGY
Dec 13, 2013 18:12:01 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: Senator Shelby a Republican from Alabama has appropriated Defense spending for victims to be violated inhumanely with probes that itch , burn, shock and some have Global Positioning Systems (GPS)from companies like Positive I.D..
Dec 13, 2013 18:15:47 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: Di HAVE BEEN A v2k VICTIM FOR 23 YEARS AND HAVE TRAVELED THE WORLD WOTH LOWLIFES THAT GET MONEY FOR RESEARCH IN THE FORM OF GRANTS FOLLOWING ME AND TELLING PEOPLE I AM, A COMMUNIST TERRORIST WITH ALQAIDA, HOMOSEXUAL THAT MUTILATES HIMSELF , HITMAN AN MAFIA
Dec 13, 2013 18:18:07 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: The United States Constitution is suppose to protect us citizens but in reality it is not woth the ink that it is written in unless you are a millionaire.
Dec 13, 2013 18:19:23 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: I will visit you the next time I am in England if you can get the V2K out of my head.You all need to form a V2K Victim Security Task Force and post security at the hospital generators , fire alarms, inside and outside the operating and recovery rooms.
Dec 13, 2013 18:22:51 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: In direct conflict with christian ideology I am an advocate of assasinating the doctors and their accomplices that implant victims involuntarily with V2K because I have been tortured for 23 years.
Dec 13, 2013 18:24:23 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: The lowlifes when they travel abroad get help from the U.S. State Dept. with diplomatic passports and they always try to get next to the [police with an offer to train them in neighborhood watch and vehicular surveillance and pursuit.
Dec 13, 2013 18:26:34 GMT -8
Mark Iannicelli: Please check out the book The COINTELPRO PAPERS for an understanding how the F.B.I. conducts counterintelligence operations. Can you help me get the V2K out of my head?
Dec 13, 2013 18:28:11 GMT -8