Cap-and-trade limits of carbon dioxide emissions are burning up a lot of ink these days. Briefly, the idea is to set a limit on how much CO2 and other greenhouse gases could be created each year. Companies that create these gases–utilities, refineries, factories, and perhaps even ranches–would have to buy permits to do so. Permits would be traded on a market. The cost, of course, gets passed through the supply chain and ultimately to the consumer.
The White House has put its weight behind a market-based approach to emissions and a bill is starting its way through Congress. The New York Times suggests that this policy has broad enough support that it’s achieved the status of consensus. The approach
has been embraced by President Obama, Democratic leaders in Congress, mainstream environmental groups and a growing number of business interests, including energy-consuming industries like autos, steel and aluminum.
The Times apparently forgot to check with some Oklahoma elected officials. Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Cheyenn) has joined the Rural American Solutions Group in condemning cap and trade as unfair to rural residents:
On Tuesday 16 Republican members of the U.S. House, all members of the Rural America Solutions Group, spoke out against the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. Choosing to call it “the Democrats’ national energy tax on rural America,” they said the bill would disproportionately spike rural American energy bills, harm agriculture production and threaten small businesses.
The Oklahoma House of Representatives has also weighed in against cap and trade.
Continue Reading »