Business Community Changes Course on Climate Change
This has been brewing for sometime, but the business community here in the US is finally getting behind the idea of national regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide. The latest group to come out in favor represents the big Wall St players.
The specifics of what they are calling for:
- “size-able, sensible long-term cuts” to US carbon emissions.
- It said Congress should also establish an economy-wide carbon price to stimulate the creation of a US cap-and-trade regime.
The reason why is simple - they are afraid of the regulatory risk that comes about through inaction. They don't want to face a patchwork of state-by-state regulation and they know national policy will eventually be drafted on this issue :
With big business on-board, passage of nationwide caps combined with cap-and-trade (thereby using market incentives to figure out the most efficient methods of reduction) are inevitable. It would seem to me that the real remaining questions are:
1) Will the business lobby support truly meaningful reductions, or will they aim for a cap that isn't agressive enough/efficacious?
The recent moves we are seeing by the business community are intended to give them a seat at the table when the policy gets made. To whatever extent they can, they will attempt to get a system which is less stringent, with higher caps than what are truly required. The hope is that the policy eventually gets made around the science, but that seems like a duboius proposition.
2) Will the Bush Administration work with the other parties to move this kind of policy forward, or will we have to wait until the next president's term to see action?
I don't think I need to spell out my view on this one.
The specifics of what they are calling for:
- “size-able, sensible long-term cuts” to US carbon emissions.
- It said Congress should also establish an economy-wide carbon price to stimulate the creation of a US cap-and-trade regime.
The reason why is simple - they are afraid of the regulatory risk that comes about through inaction. They don't want to face a patchwork of state-by-state regulation and they know national policy will eventually be drafted on this issue :
- “In the absence of strong federal leadership there is a risk that US businesses may get left behind, losing ground against competitors in the rapidly growing global market for low-carbon solutions,” it said in the statement.
- “By establishing a national policy rather than leaving leadership to the courts and state governments, it would remove unnecessary risk in asset management and corporate governance and help to regularise an increasingly complex regulatory environment.”
With big business on-board, passage of nationwide caps combined with cap-and-trade (thereby using market incentives to figure out the most efficient methods of reduction) are inevitable. It would seem to me that the real remaining questions are:
1) Will the business lobby support truly meaningful reductions, or will they aim for a cap that isn't agressive enough/efficacious?
The recent moves we are seeing by the business community are intended to give them a seat at the table when the policy gets made. To whatever extent they can, they will attempt to get a system which is less stringent, with higher caps than what are truly required. The hope is that the policy eventually gets made around the science, but that seems like a duboius proposition.
2) Will the Bush Administration work with the other parties to move this kind of policy forward, or will we have to wait until the next president's term to see action?
I don't think I need to spell out my view on this one.
posted by rawls at 2:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home