Cap and Trade creates Controversy
.
December 11, 2009
Filed under News
This past week Copenhagen had its climate conference discussing ways to make our world more Eco-friendly world. All world leaders were invited. One of the topics discussed- Cap and Trade.
Cap and Trade is a system that would count the number emissions a company is producing. If the company exceeds the ‘cap’ or total, they will be forced to purchase more credits.
Another option is to buy credits from another company that has not used their credits. It could influence the economy because the companies would be trading.
The goal is to for companies to force less pollution
Obama took this idea all the way to the House of Representatives this past June and it got past with a vote of 219 to 212, though the date to vote on it in the senate has yet to be decided. It has been on hold since June 2008 because our senate is focusing more on things such as health care, and Afghanistan.
This bill will allow companies who stay under their limit to sell their extra credits, and receive additional income. The companies that exceed their limits, can trade with a company.
Thus, Company A has exceeded their allotted amount of emissions could trade with Company B who has not.
With this income, a company could do many things, including making them even more energy efficient, or even creating more jobs. This would push company’s renewable fuels that are cleaner, and better for the environment.
Coach Legrand said “I believe it will help what we are trying to do worldwide environmentally.”
Lindsey Graham, South Carolina’s senator, supports this bill. He believes that it will bring a “clean-energy future”.
South Carolina isn’t siding with him.
Senior Sean McCawley said, “I don’t believe that the government should interfere, but I think they do need to regulate.”
In South Carolina it could hurt the farmers because of the increased cost of fertilizers, and fuel.
Second, Obama said “’Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money.” This is not good for South Carolina because of our many coal power plants.
The Associated Press says that “An American public that says it supports action to reduce pollution from burning fossil fuels, but isn’t willing to pay the higher energy prices that would probably come with it.”
The real question is: Do we want to raise taxes for people that make 250,000 dollars a year or more or do you want start the preserving the environment on an extreme degree; the senate date to debate on this has yet to be decided.
Loading ...
Comments
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!