Total global emissions have risen by a cumulative 25% since the beginning of the decade. But only a small fraction of those emissions came from North America, Western Europe and OECD economies. In fact, emissions in the most advanced economies of the world have grown by a paltry 5%, one-tenth the 50% increase seen of the developing world. This completey removes the aurguemnt of cap and trade measures being ‘the most effective way to control greenhouse gases is through a cap and trade mechanism‘.- Think healthcare was a hard swallow? Here comes Cap&Trade down your throat…
- BRITISH CAP & TRADE TURNS INTO A SCAM
- James Hansen – Sorry
- The Cost of Warner-Lieberman ponzi scheme….
- The economic impacts of S. 2191, summarized from IER
- Crap and Trade…Here comes end of free market
- Why cap and trade would backfire
- TIME’s – Global Warming “War” on the worldAll posts on crap N trades
This post by James Greyson explains why a carbon-only focus hasn’t worked and cannot work.
Governments have invested a grand total of nothing at all in researching new kinds of economic instruments that work with all kinds of resources including fossil carbon. Nevertheless such an instrument has been designed, a version of insurance that requires neither taxes nor caps. It implements the ‘circular economy’ described in China’s national plan and would boost rather than suppress economic growth.
Circular Economics
material form even though it cannot escape having inputs of energy.” This is not academic: China’s 11th five year plan for 2006-2010 established a national goal of circular economics, “It is an overall, urgent and long-term strategic task for China to vigorously develop the circular economy” (Zhou, 2006). The future for growth is circular economics where more economic activity would mean a faster pace of change away from waste-making and towards looking after the world and all its inhabitants. This would preserve and regenerate material value, co-operation and natural capital instead of losing it, so growth would work to build the basis for more growth. Today this may appear idealistic. Yet if circular economics was already practiced, and people were accustomed to prosperity based on resource security, then any proposal to adopt an exploitive self-defeating vision would be laughable.
Precycling
A free market in harmony with nature
Shrinking material and energy demands
Read More From Source:James Hansen… Carbon tax or we all die" -
This entry was posted on January 9, 2011 at 1:37 pm and is filed under EHS News

























The EPA maintains State Resource Locators and contact information for several topics: Air Quality – Ambient








Connect with EHS News
By AHRALL payday loans