Maurice, unlike many other investment related topics, we disagree almost completely on this one. Your views on emissions, causes of asthma, CO2 and the impact on global warming are pretty much at odds with the scientific community and generally accepted scientific research.
As usual, the problem with doing anything constructive on these issues is created by a lack of appreciation of what economists like to call "externalities."
If one wanted to reduce CO2 emissions (which HAVE caused measurable temperature changes, especially in the last 50 years), one could start by severely taxing coal production at each site according to the amount of environmental damage contributed by specific mining operations. An article in the current issue of "Science," the weekly publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, explains in great detail, through accepted research studies the damage caused by sheering off the tops of mountains and pushing the waste into valleys -- a common practice in many traditional coal mining regions of the U.S.
My point is that, because of failure to recognize externalities, people pay too little attention to the costs of coal as a fuel and end up thinking it is still the cheapest way to produce electricity, outside of hydroelectric power.
Specific taxation to prevent undesirable after effects is, I think, a far more practical way to deal with the problem than tradable citizenships.
Art |
