<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Why John McCain isn’t the candidate to stop global warming]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Sean Casten http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:52:22 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/1 Why is this a progressive issue?

Joe,

I agree with the urgency to lower GHG emissions, but not that the solutions are uniquely progressive.  Indeed, framing it as if there is only one political philosophy that fits is downright dangerous, since we need all oars rowing on this one.  

I could very easily make the case that this is a libertarian / fiscal conservative issue.  Remove subsidies to fossil fuel extraction & utilization.  Remove subsidies to utility inefficiency.  Put prices on externalities - including carbon - so that capital can be efficiently allocated.  Structure tradeable emissions permits to be fiscally neutral, such that the payments to the clean folks are exactly offset by payments from the dirty folks, in the name of economic protection.  (E.g., wealth redistribution, not wealth reduction.)

Those of a progressive political persuasion may think this approach is flawed, to the extent that they believe that top-down gov't regulation is more efficient than markets.  But that doesn't mean that they would disagree on the goal.  And what we really need right now are folks pushing towards the goal as fast as we can, rather than arguing over the path.  The progressive vs. conservative framing is at core, one of tactics.  Reducing GHG emissions is non-partisan, and strategic.

I don't frankly have an opinion as to whether McCain specifically would take this approach or not - but don't see any reason why the left has a natural monopoly on the issue.

]]> Why is this a progressive issue?

Joe,

I agree with the urgency to lower GHG emissions, but not that the solutions are uniquely progressive.  Indeed, framing it as if there is only one political philosophy that fits is downright dangerous, since we need all oars rowing on this one.  

I could very easily make the case that this is a libertarian / fiscal conservative issue.  Remove subsidies to fossil fuel extraction & utilization.  Remove subsidies to utility inefficiency.  Put prices on externalities - including carbon - so that capital can be efficiently allocated.  Structure tradeable emissions permits to be fiscally neutral, such that the payments to the clean folks are exactly offset by payments from the dirty folks, in the name of economic protection.  (E.g., wealth redistribution, not wealth reduction.)

Those of a progressive political persuasion may think this approach is flawed, to the extent that they believe that top-down gov't regulation is more efficient than markets.  But that doesn't mean that they would disagree on the goal.  And what we really need right now are folks pushing towards the goal as fast as we can, rather than arguing over the path.  The progressive vs. conservative framing is at core, one of tactics.  Reducing GHG emissions is non-partisan, and strategic.

I don't frankly have an opinion as to whether McCain specifically would take this approach or not - but don't see any reason why the left has a natural monopoly on the issue.

]]> Comment #2 by Delay And Deny http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 04:02:13 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/2 The Self-Referential Prose of Joe Romm


You publish a thought piece in "Salon" (how hard is that these days).

Then you quote yourself in a Grist post.

And you repeat it in your book (how many copies sold)?

Is this helping?

jabailo.johnmccain.com


]]> The Self-Referential Prose of Joe Romm


You publish a thought piece in "Salon" (how hard is that these days).

Then you quote yourself in a Grist post.

And you repeat it in your book (how many copies sold)?

Is this helping?

jabailo.johnmccain.com


]]> Comment #3 by David Roberts http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 04:12:26 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/3 Jabailo,

I just popped over to check out your McCain page. Looks like you've got zero contributors and have raised zero dollars. Maybe it's your own pitch you should be worrying about.

grist.org

]]> Jabailo,

I just popped over to check out your McCain page. Looks like you've got zero contributors and have raised zero dollars. Maybe it's your own pitch you should be worrying about.

grist.org

]]> Comment #4 by Charles Barton http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 04:18:31 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/4 So Smart, So dumb

Joe why is it that you are so smart when it comes to Global Warming, and so dumb when it comes to nuclear power?

Charles Barton

]]> So Smart, So dumb

Joe why is it that you are so smart when it comes to Global Warming, and so dumb when it comes to nuclear power?

Charles Barton

]]> Comment #5 by GRLCowan http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 04:58:55 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/5 $0.2 million per tonne uranium; $4 million ...

per uranium-tonne-equivalent in natural gas.

Before taxes, except royalties. The taxes on natural gas can hardly be less than five times the total revenue on uranium. So someone whose best job ever was a civil service one might understandably, although not excusably, proceed as if the way to defeat global warming is to replace coal with natural gas, cutting carbon emissions in half, unless perhaps several billion Asians find similar amounts of gas per person and start burning it.

An unpleasant graphic.

How shall the car gain nuclear cachet?

]]> $0.2 million per tonne uranium; $4 million ...

per uranium-tonne-equivalent in natural gas.

Before taxes, except royalties. The taxes on natural gas can hardly be less than five times the total revenue on uranium. So someone whose best job ever was a civil service one might understandably, although not excusably, proceed as if the way to defeat global warming is to replace coal with natural gas, cutting carbon emissions in half, unless perhaps several billion Asians find similar amounts of gas per person and start burning it.

An unpleasant graphic.

How shall the car gain nuclear cachet?

]]> Comment #6 by GRLCowan http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:13:13 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/6 I am reminded that there IS a progressive way :

Stop paying the rule-making class out of fossil fuel revenues. Detax fossil fuel carbon.

That way, they'll put the environment and public health ahead of maximizing the sales of the most expensive possible variety of buried burnable carbon, and the unpleasant graphic's 2020 update will include solid dark blue at its right margin. That probably can't be prevented no matter what happens, but if it happens a few years earlier, a few innocents will be spared gas pipeline blasts, etcetera.

How shall the car gain nuclear cachet?

]]> I am reminded that there IS a progressive way :

Stop paying the rule-making class out of fossil fuel revenues. Detax fossil fuel carbon.

That way, they'll put the environment and public health ahead of maximizing the sales of the most expensive possible variety of buried burnable carbon, and the unpleasant graphic's 2020 update will include solid dark blue at its right margin. That probably can't be prevented no matter what happens, but if it happens a few years earlier, a few innocents will be spared gas pipeline blasts, etcetera.

How shall the car gain nuclear cachet?

]]> Comment #7 by GreyFlcn http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 06:04:16 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/7 Cowan

Perhaps you can find a way to produce Nuclear power with the same capital cost as NGCC plants.

And likely you aren't accounting for the "lifecycle cost" of that nuclear fuel.

(Anything looks better when you don't count your liabilities)

]]> Cowan

Perhaps you can find a way to produce Nuclear power with the same capital cost as NGCC plants.

And likely you aren't accounting for the "lifecycle cost" of that nuclear fuel.

(Anything looks better when you don't count your liabilities)

]]> Comment #8 by Tasermons Partner http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Fri, 08 Feb 2008 08:06:08 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/8 Well,...

...at least he's better than Romney or Huckabee.  I'll take McCain over those two any day.

]]> Well,...

...at least he's better than Romney or Huckabee.  I'll take McCain over those two any day.

]]> Comment #9 by Ron Steenblik http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/ Sat, 09 Feb 2008 18:45:46 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/no-climate-for-old-men/9 I agree with Sean

These are only my personal opinions.

]]> I agree with Sean

These are only my personal opinions.

]]>