<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Rep. Ed Markey unveils ambitious new climate legislation]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by sunflower http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/ Wed, 28 May 2008 09:34:28 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/1 Pray this happens. God help us.

]]> Pray this happens. God help us.

]]> Comment #2 by Michael Shellenberger http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/ Wed, 28 May 2008 10:28:11 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/2 A Fairy Tale -- But Perhaps a Hopeful One

Just as the utterly disappointing Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (CSA) goes up for debate, Congressman Ed Markey has released his own version of climate legislation, this time with real money invested in clean energy RD&D - $25 billion a year. Sound to good to be true? It is.

Our analysis here:

http://thebreakthrough.org/blog/2008/05/a_fairytale_alter ...

]]> A Fairy Tale -- But Perhaps a Hopeful One

Just as the utterly disappointing Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (CSA) goes up for debate, Congressman Ed Markey has released his own version of climate legislation, this time with real money invested in clean energy RD&D - $25 billion a year. Sound to good to be true? It is.

Our analysis here:

http://thebreakthrough.org/blog/2008/05/a_fairytale_alter ...

]]> Comment #3 by mwildfire http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/ Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:47:08 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/3 cost containment

I checked out Shellenberger's link above--he says the CSA is so anxious to avoid an industry backlash that it achieves nothing, while Markey's bill goes to the opposite extreme  "with no cost containment provisions whatsoever." But the idea that we have to put in loopholes for industry "in case the cost gets too high," mistakes the relative importance of protecting "the economy" versus the ecosystems of which our human economy is a small part. If we don't do something very serious, very soon, about climate change our economy will collapse anyway because it is not independent of the natural world. I am not bothering to call my senators to support the CSA--I hope it does fail, as in current form it wastes yet more billions on non-solutions. We can't afford that. Maybe after the November election we will have a Congress and a President ready to do what must be done. Unlikely, but at least there's a chance. Bush will veto this one anyway, if there are ANY provisions industry doesn't like.

]]> cost containment

I checked out Shellenberger's link above--he says the CSA is so anxious to avoid an industry backlash that it achieves nothing, while Markey's bill goes to the opposite extreme  "with no cost containment provisions whatsoever." But the idea that we have to put in loopholes for industry "in case the cost gets too high," mistakes the relative importance of protecting "the economy" versus the ecosystems of which our human economy is a small part. If we don't do something very serious, very soon, about climate change our economy will collapse anyway because it is not independent of the natural world. I am not bothering to call my senators to support the CSA--I hope it does fail, as in current form it wastes yet more billions on non-solutions. We can't afford that. Maybe after the November election we will have a Congress and a President ready to do what must be done. Unlikely, but at least there's a chance. Bush will veto this one anyway, if there are ANY provisions industry doesn't like.

]]> Comment #4 by lorna salzman http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/ Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:41:55 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/on-your-markey/4 Shellenberger: same old shell game

"Cost containment", otherwise known as cheap energy is what got us into this mess in the first place. This isn't a surprising comment given that Shellenberger's book Break Through says that Prosperity is the answer to the world's problems. I have news for him: Prosperity, in the top 1% of the world's people, is the PROBLEM. This fan of the WTO, IMF and globalization thinks that funneling cap and trade or carbon tax revenues into the grimy hands of industry will solve our problems. Well, they have had decades to solv e them, and if they believe in the free market, then let them raise capital from private investors. I shudder to think of the outstretched hands of industry, including the large oil and coal companies, who think socialism for the rich is just fine. Had we cut off energy subsidies and tax breaks by now, renewable energy companies and entrepreneurs would hav e taken off and would be on the verge of replacing oil, gas, coal and nukes. Now these guys want MORE money from us, while pretending the want to "contain costs". The Shellenberger scam is classic neo-liberalism in green clothing: reinforce existing energy systems, including coal plants for their full lifetime, while drawing up plans to continue corporate control and make sure that nothing, including conservation and reduced energy demand, stand in the way of their new profits. Congratulations, Michael, you have earned your Rockefeller and Cummings foundation grants. The capitalists will be very proud of you. The rest of us, however, aren't joining these cheerleaders. Check out my review of Break Through, at http://www.culturechange.org or http://www.lornasalzman.com for the full story of today's snake oil salesmen.

]]> Shellenberger: same old shell game

"Cost containment", otherwise known as cheap energy is what got us into this mess in the first place. This isn't a surprising comment given that Shellenberger's book Break Through says that Prosperity is the answer to the world's problems. I have news for him: Prosperity, in the top 1% of the world's people, is the PROBLEM. This fan of the WTO, IMF and globalization thinks that funneling cap and trade or carbon tax revenues into the grimy hands of industry will solve our problems. Well, they have had decades to solv e them, and if they believe in the free market, then let them raise capital from private investors. I shudder to think of the outstretched hands of industry, including the large oil and coal companies, who think socialism for the rich is just fine. Had we cut off energy subsidies and tax breaks by now, renewable energy companies and entrepreneurs would hav e taken off and would be on the verge of replacing oil, gas, coal and nukes. Now these guys want MORE money from us, while pretending the want to "contain costs". The Shellenberger scam is classic neo-liberalism in green clothing: reinforce existing energy systems, including coal plants for their full lifetime, while drawing up plans to continue corporate control and make sure that nothing, including conservation and reduced energy demand, stand in the way of their new profits. Congratulations, Michael, you have earned your Rockefeller and Cummings foundation grants. The capitalists will be very proud of you. The rest of us, however, aren't joining these cheerleaders. Check out my review of Break Through, at http://www.culturechange.org or http://www.lornasalzman.com for the full story of today's snake oil salesmen.

]]>