<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for From Rep. John Larson]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by The Cunctator</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/a-carbon-tax-even-dingell-haters-can-love/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:05:17 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/a-carbon-tax-even-dingell-haters-can-love/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Carbon tax v. cap-and-trade the wrong debate<p>I don't understand why you insist on pitting a carbon tax against a cap-and-trade system. They have different strengths and there's no reason they couldn't be implemented in parallel.<p>
That said, even pro-carbon-tax economists like Shapiro admit that a cap-and-trade system by definition offers more emissions certainty than a carbon tax. I can't wait to see your counterargument.<p>
Thomas Casten is <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/15/9316/71425" rel="nofollow">exactly right when he says that we should be looking to build a new, more efficient energy network. Using his standards, most of the bills out there, including Lieberman-Warner, fail miserably. Lieberman-Warner in particular props up the coal industry, funneling massive taxpayer dollars into supporting inefficient, centralized energy production.<p>
As I learn more about the policy possibilities, I keep realizing that <a href="http://www.mitra.biz/blog/archives/2007/03/gores_recommend.html" rel="nofollow">Al Gore's recommendations weren't just a set of kitchen-sink proposals but a comprehensive approach to effectively solving global warming emissions and building a better standard of living and opportunity for everybody at the same time.

<p><a href="http://www.hillheat.com/" rel="nofollow">Hill Heat</a></p></a></p></a></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Carbon tax v. cap-and-trade the wrong debate<p>I don't understand why you insist on pitting a carbon tax against a cap-and-trade system. They have different strengths and there's no reason they couldn't be implemented in parallel.<p>
That said, even pro-carbon-tax economists like Shapiro admit that a cap-and-trade system by definition offers more emissions certainty than a carbon tax. I can't wait to see your counterargument.<p>
Thomas Casten is <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/15/9316/71425" rel="nofollow">exactly right when he says that we should be looking to build a new, more efficient energy network. Using his standards, most of the bills out there, including Lieberman-Warner, fail miserably. Lieberman-Warner in particular props up the coal industry, funneling massive taxpayer dollars into supporting inefficient, centralized energy production.<p>
As I learn more about the policy possibilities, I keep realizing that <a href="http://www.mitra.biz/blog/archives/2007/03/gores_recommend.html" rel="nofollow">Al Gore's recommendations weren't just a set of kitchen-sink proposals but a comprehensive approach to effectively solving global warming emissions and building a better standard of living and opportunity for everybody at the same time.

<p><a href="http://www.hillheat.com/" rel="nofollow">Hill Heat</a></p></a></p></a></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>