RUserious’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Until I read Hot, Flat and Crowded, I did not know there was an alternative route than the cap "n" trade one for tackling the problem of carbon emissions.  We have been hearing about cap "n" trade for a long time but I am sure most Americans are like me - not familiar with the alternative carbon tax route.

  Another tax idea I like is the one by proposed by the Rocky Mountain Institute, which is to tax all consumers who purchase cars and trucks with poor fuel economy and give a rebate to all consumers who purchase cars or trucks with higher than average fuel economy.  The level of the tax or rebate would increase as you go towards most efficient or least efficient.  The system would be revenue neutral and require little bureaucracy, but its effect could be immediate and wide spread.  Companies who choose to be the most green would grow.  This could easily be done with household appliances as well.

  To me, this is SIMPLY smart.  This is DIFFERENT than saying it is smart because it is simple.

  I don't favor the carbon tax over the cap "n" trade route because it is simpler, but because I think it would be effective more quickly.

  Regarding all the talk of politics and timing, I also think many Americans are tired of the rushed approach to passing bills.  I think this is a good trend.

   

  On Somebody hide Tom Friedman's ball posted 7 months, 3 weeks ago 46 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I thought new had to be new to be new?

  I am all for solar cookers (I have designed and built several of them myself), but, I am not thilled about someone winning a $75,000 prize for an invention that has been around for several hundred years.  This solar box cooker looks like the one Napoleon's troops were using in the mid 1800's.  The only apparent difference is cardboard instead of wood and plexiglass instead of glass.  I wish I would have entered their competition! 

  On Kyoto stove wins $75,000 FT climate change innovation competition posted 7 months, 3 weeks ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Simple is better.

  I have been an avid reader of Grist from the get-go and have been a fan of Thomas Friedman too.  I read his book, Hot Flat and Crowded.  I have to agree with almost everything Thomas Friedman said in his recent column, Show Us the Ball.  A cap and trade system would be complicated and cumbersome, while a carbon tax would not.  Either path could work towards the goal of reducing carbon emissions but I would rather have a simple, upfront, easy to understand, transparent strategy.  In my opinion, the longer and more complex a bill is, the more loop holes it will have and the more policing will be required for it to function.  A cap and trade system would be complex, complicated and inefficient.  I am for a big wamping carbon tax.  I look forward to the day when fosil fuels are gone because they are too expensive to compete with clean, renewable energy.  Our family has already shrunk back our carbon footprint to half the US average and could do more if renewable engergy systems were scaled up and less expensive.

  Regarding the timing of his column, I think now is the perfect time to fully vet both proposed paths to lowering carbon emissions.  I don't believe in insult as a form of argument.  David Robert's framing of Thomas Friedman's column was verging on insulting and did a poor job of proving the merits of cap and trade over a carbon tax.

  On Somebody hide Tom Friedman's ball posted 7 months, 3 weeks ago 46 Responses