re: EPA regs to kill nuclear power

So EPA regs are supposed to shut down Coal plants, now they will shut down nuclear plants too? Where the frick do they expect to get electricity from? Nuclear is the most efficient and clean energy we have, even with the small risk of a meltdown.

They are going to hit these plants with all of these regs and too many will shut down at once, and the grid will overload. It takes time to build new plants with new technology to meet regs.

quote:

---

Bottom line someone, somewhere, must determine how much carbon is produced in order to tax it. That taxing authority will be the same one that your link points out doesn't calculate carbon production in a fair nor accurate way.

---

Coal, oil, and gas producers already report production data.

quote:

---

The same way the government determines what the cap should be in cap-and-trade: they make a best estimate.

Both schemes are arbitrary to the extent that a carbon tax sets the price and lets the market seek the optimal level of emissions, while cap-and-trade sets the optimal level of emissions and lets the market seek the price.

But if there's one thing markets hate more than higher energy prices, it's higher and more volatile energy prices. Plus, most cap-and-trade schemes only address the electricity sector and that's a minority of emissions; you'll need ancillary taxes anyway to address transportation and manufacturing, so why not just combine them? And carbon taxes leave less room for special interests and grandfather clauses which make them toothless. A carbon tax bill can be written in a page or two. You need a whole new regulatory scheme for cap-and-trade, since you're trying to create a new market from scratch.

---

The "optimal level of emissions" is zero net emissions. The subjectivity comes in determining how long we should take to get there.

I prefer the cap & trade approach. The price the market sets is far more accurate than then price the government sets. Yes - it would be more volatile over short periods - but over the long haul the market would set the best price.

Cap & trade can encompass transportation. California's cap & trade is going to do that in 2015. its just a question of writing the law.

quote:

---

Coal, oil, and gas producers already report production data.

---

I thought we were talking about a CO2 tax, not a oil, gas and coal tax. Measuring production is a simple volumetric measurement. But that just tells you how much oil, gas or coal is produced.

Measuring the CO2 produced from use... is not a simple measurement. Hell, poorly controlled combustion means higher CO/CO2 production. How do you propose that be measured exactly? Should a producer of low-emission combustion facility pay the same as one with poor combustion performance?

What about production that is not used in CO2 generating activities. Do you charge ethylene producers for CO2 production, even though they aren't producing CO2?

Finally, why are you only talking about coal, oil and gas? They aren't the only CO2 emitters. From farmers, to cattle ranchers, to bread bakers, to beer brewers... how are you going to measure their CO2 production?

What about people with fireplaces? How will you measure the CO2 generated? Require combustion controls tied to a revenue meter?

Or maybe you were proposing the government just pick winners and losers by only taxing coal, oil and gas? Sorry... I simply don't understand how your idea works.