New York Public Radio Listeners Love Cap and Trade
Part of the irrational fear of Cap and Trade is based on the idea that some Wall Street Fat Cats (or Al Gore) will make out like bandits selling derivatives in carbon certificates. So I bet you never imagined that the most popular pledge gift for public radio subscribers would turn out to be… retired carbon certificates!
WAMC in Albany New York was given 600 carbon certificates to give listeners who called in and pledged their support for the radio station with a $100 pledge. They imagined would make for a rather dull pledge gift. After all, everybody disapproves of Cap and Trade, and nobody understands it.
So imagine the surprise of the station manager when not only were carbon certificates more popular than Pete Seeger albums, but they actually drew pledges up to $1,000!
“We were inundated with telephone calls,” is how the station manager described it. “Some people wanted one for each grandchild.”
The carbon credits were donated by the Adirondack Council a local environmental organization. It bought the carbon certificates at the first US Cap and Trade program – the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. popularly known as Reggie (RGGI) it sets a ceiling on carbon emissions from utilities in New York and nine other Northeastern states.
Under Cap and Trade, utilities must pay to pollute, and there is a ceiling or “cap” on the total regional carbon pollution allowed. By buying and retiring the finite number of carbon certificates available, pressure is exerted on utilities to clean up.
The group retires the allowances so they can never be used to create carbon dioxide emissions.
The money they paid goes to a fund operated by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, which issues grants for energy conservation and clean energy development.
As the number of available allowances is reduced, that pressures utilities to invest in energy efficiency, add combined heat & power to their plants (to dilute pollution per kwh produced) or switch to lower polluting fuel like natural gas, or to pollution-free energy like solar or wind power.
Image: GreenLivingIdeas
Source: New York Times
More from Susan Kraemer: Journalists on Twitter
You Might Also Like
Massachusetts Earned $50 Million from Cap+Trade in 2009
“Carbon Tax” More Popular than “Cap-and-Trade” with US Voters
Yet Another Poll (from Yale) Shows Wide Support for Strong Climate and Energy Policies, Including Cap & Trade
“Energy Only” Bill Got a Failing Score From CBO
January 4th, 2010 at 7:34 am
You people are so foolish.
Carbon credits are no more real than stocks on wall street. They are play money just like stocks, gold certificates, and 401k’s.
It is fantasy.
January 4th, 2010 at 9:53 am
Tell Duke Energy that emissions credits are not real.
They just paid $98 million for exceeding their SOx and NOx emissions credits (under the current EPA Cap and Trade program to bring down acid rain pollution).
They’ll be relieved. Maybe they can pay the fine in Monopoly money.
January 4th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
As a writer why would you label a fear of cap and trade as irrational. In Europe cap and trade has failed and resulted in some large scale fraud. It is also controlled by large business and hidden from public view and accountability. A carbon tax on the other hand is very visible and can be easily administered.
January 4th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
The only one making money on cap and trade are industries and their lobbyist who are using legal bribery (campaign contributions)to create this myth that this will clean up the environment. All it will do is increase utility bills because no matter how much green power is generated the utility must produce enough electricity to meet the peek and they can’t count on wind and sun to meet the peek. It would be pretty tough today with the global freezing that has enveloped the entire country… Pretty simple, they have to invest in green energy to placate the lobbyist from green energy who are buying access and influence with campaign contributions and pay cap and trade fees that Wall Street and their lobbyiest have invented as another investment for Bernie Madoff posers to use and the utilities will still use coal, gas and nuclear to generate enough energy to meet the peek. Where is the payoff? btw Susan, I have never seen anyone post a comment on an article they wrote.
January 4th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
If companies are just going to treat this as a tax, then why not just create a tax? Why go through the whole process of setting up a brand new market? Why set this up as a huge giveaway to Wall Street? It makes absolutely no sense.
January 4th, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Irrational fear because – Cap and Trade worked in Europe.
http://www.gmfus.org/doc/GMF%20Grubb%2035.pdf
http://cleantechnica.com/2009/09/28/what-the-senate-should-know-about-cap-and-trade-in-europe/
It reduced EU emissions
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=eu-on-track-to-meet-or-exceed-origi-2009-11
and helped build more renewable energy than here in the US. The leading wind and solar companies are now there, not here, the most energy efficient houses are being built there not here. They build houses that don’t need heat: PassivHaus Net Zero buildings are way ahead of LEED standards.
Result? The average per capita carbon footprint in Germany, Denmark, UK, Norway is half the US average now.
http://cleantechnica.com/2010/01/01/new-carbon-footprint-calculation-accounts-for-country-of-consumption/
Cap and trade worked here in reducing acid rain
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-and-trade-cut-emissions-50-in-2-2009-12
and worked in Kyoto signing countries to really speed them ahead of us in renewable energy, and lower greenhouse gases.
Where has a carbon tax worked to create more renewable energy, and reduce emissions?