re: EPA regs to kill nuclear power

quote:

---

Pigovian taxes are better because they don't pick winners

---

I think your link demonstrates the opposite.

Barring direct measurement and tracking the end use of all CO2 sources (which isn't physically nor fiscally possible), bureaucracies will come up with empirical models to "estimate" the production and use tax bases.

Clearly, the bureaucracy did pick a winner/loser in the case you cited by manipulating the production "model". I have little confidence next time they will get it right.

quote:

---

Pigovian taxes are better because they don't pick winners, they just say "okay, carbon is now expensive, may the best green tech win."

---

How does the government determine what the tax should be?

quote:

---

Direct action gets you Solyndra and regulatory capture. As seen here, where nuclear is now going to have to fight the favored techs of the right and the left with 94.2% of its arms tied behind its back.

---

The government's green energy loan program has actually posted a profit for taxpayers. Solyndra was a loser but enough of the loans did well enough we made money. Highlighting Solyndra is selection bias at its best. If you took Warren Buffet's worst investment and ignored everything else he's done he'd look like a moron, too. On the other hand take joe schmo who invests based on what he hear's from Jim Cramer, and his best investment might make him look like a genius.