Friday, March 12th, 2010

The folks at the Wall Street Journal are brilliant (most days) and I find myself reading the WSJ in print and online every day. When a topic hits the opinion page, it’s usually a great piece of analysis.

Today was no exception.

‘Kyoto’s Long Goodbye’ is a great piece on exactly what I was trying to convey in my post this past Tuesday – Kyoto was D.O.A. because of its inherent flaws. C’mon folks – it’s a TAX! It took some countries who were early supporters of Kyoto to learn what most Americans knew at the outset:

The irony is that Kyoto has handed them every reason not to participate. Europe knew all along that it couldn’t meet its quotas, so it created an out in “offsets.” A British factory, say, buys a credit to pay for basic efficiency improvements in a Chinese coal plant, like installing smokestack scrubbers. This is a tax on the Brits to make Chinese industries more competitive. Sweet deal if you can get it.

You see, if you are successful as a country, you are penalized by having to pay a ‘cap & trade’ offset and the money goes to your competitor in another country; a country that has no unions, EPA, etc. How the heck can you compete with that?

Ok, so it may have taken a few years before the eco-friendly lightbulbs to go off in their heads, but at least they did. Kyoto is pie-in-the-sky.

WSJ: Kyoto’s Long Goodbye
TAE FLASHBACK – Kyoto Lite?

  • Share/Bookmark

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.