The article wrongly assumes there is no dividend with cap and trade. Under Australia's ETS should it ever happen 100% of the proceeds will supposedly go towards green projects. There are some crucial advantages of c&t over a carbon tax and some of the loopholes like offsets and exemptions will no doubt recur under a tax. The current problem isn't so much the mechanism but the lack of will to do anything at all. As in Australia it seems likely the US c&t scheme will be undermined by giveaways. No pain no gain. Renewable energy quotas and sector specific technical standards (eg vehicle mileage) may create conflicting aims. For example a shift from coal to gas fired generation will reduce CO2 but won't meet a renewables quota.

Even if the ETS was administered in a tough way there are other foibles. Australia exports four times as much black coal as it uses domestically yet exports are untouched. The rate of cap reduction may be too weak. The dividend from c&t auction receipts may be frittered away on futile endeavours like carbon capture and storage.

As a compromise between a cap and a tax based system perhaps a no-exceptions fixed CO2 price could be brought in. Everybody from petrol refiners to brown coal miners should pay say $20 a tonne on in-stream and downstream CO2 emissions. That should include export coal and LNG. The government should then resist lobbying and other forms of blackmail as follows:
Industry; we have offsets. Government; not interested.
Industry; we're vulnerable to trade losses. Government; have a cash subsidy instead but justify it to your competitors.
Industry; we'll go offshore. Government; see ya.

Personally I think any effort to reduce polution should be applauded.

However can we reverse climate change?

If any one has study, the past climate changes that have occured in Australia, will know that climate change happens and there is sweet $%@# all that we can do about.

The best the human population can do is to adapt to the changes, if the sea level rises, as it has done so in the past, even before the industrial revolution. The people simply moved to higher ground. When sea levels fell, people moved to the lower ground.

Cities and past civilisations have risen and fallen on the rise of the tide.

Most Interesting: A posting from NASA predicts low solar activity. The following statements are extracted from the NASA post.

“May 29, 2009: An international panel of experts led by NOAA and sponsored by NASA has released a new prediction for the next solar cycle. Solar Cycle 24 will peak, they say, in May 2013 with a below-average number of sunspots. “

"If our prediction is correct, Solar Cycle 24 will have a peak sunspot number of 90, the lowest of any cycle since 1928 when Solar Cycle 16 peaked at 78," says panel chairman Doug Biesecker of the NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center”

Low solar activity has a profound effect on Earth’s atmosphere, allowing it to cool and contract.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/29may_noaaprediction.htm
>>>>>>>>>

So maybe we should stop worrying about the non problem of anthropogenic global warming.

<”Cap-and-trade is a Temple of Doom for life on Earth, worshipped by lawmakers afraid to confront fossil special interests.”>

This is no dooms day scenario, it's a dooms day fact, only held back by the concept of time. When you add the exemptions covering every major corporate polluter and exporter, there's no incentive to reduce fossil fuel consumption, just another excuse to raise prices and increase profits. The only outcome will be richer polluting corporations and higher charges for consumers, all big business will increase charges, when they have to pay pollution taxes, as we are seeing happening and being forecast by government and business. Any deadlines or targets will be softened until they don't exist, which they are already doing on a large scale. What solution is that, other than fatalistic stupidity.

<”Can we reverse climate change?”>

There's no chance of reversing climate change until the major cause is removed, with all problems, you remove the cause first and repair the damage. Ideological humanity promotes the causes, accelerating the damage, sounds like a run away cancer to me and denialist perpetrators. The inconvenience caused by humanity changing it's approach to energy, would he minuscule if done properly, for the benefit of the planet and not just the ideological elite.

Well, stormbay, why not step up to the plate and top yourself for Mother Gaia?

Leadership by example, and all ... ;)

Clownfish said.........

"Well, stormbay, why not step up to the plate and top yourself for Mother Gaia?

Leadership by example, and all ... ;)"

Well, you certainly got the first part of your name right! Suggesting someone top themselves is not only a stupid and childish utterance, it also contributes nothing to any discussion concerning the article.

In my business, mental health, I see many people on a daily basis who would commit suicide simply because of your silly suggestion. That's how damaged their functionability is! There's certainly no excuse for your insensitivity! Maybe the moderators are on a tea break this morning!

I'm guessing the name "Clownfish" has been taken from the children's cartoon film "Finding Nemo"? The use of the term "topping yourself" is an Americanism that seems to be overtaking the correct term which is "suicide" and probably gives a good indication that you watch far too much television instead of lifting your head out of dark places and realising that the rate of use of natural resources can have only one outcome for humanity and it's all bad!

Attempting to reduce carbon based climate change won't alter the fact that the resources needed to keep business functioning as usual are depleting at an alarming rate and our children and grandchildren will eventually pay for the folly of past generations.