Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (38746)	3/4/2013 9:04:22 PM
From: average joe	Respond to of 86356

Good News on Keystone and Canada Since development of the tar sands would cripple any possible efforts by Canada to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, good news on preventing approval of the pipeline is good news for Canada. And there is indeed good news. A rally in Washington D.C. against the pipeline was the biggest ever climate rally in the USA, drawing over 35,000 participants. That President Obama was golfing with oil men during the rally is a bad sign; however, John Kerry's first speech as Secretary of State included some very strong language on climate change. It would be good news indeed as we can then sell to Europe and Asia at full price instead of the US at discounted prices.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (38746)	3/4/2013 9:40:40 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

30 years after I first suggested a carbon tax [to mitigate CO2 emissions], with compensating reductions in other taxes and payments to old people and others who would otherwise face a major increase in tax [as they don't have offsetting tax reductions], the world is trundling around to my way of thinking after heading off down the Enron track of carbon credit trading scams. Mosquitoes can measure CO2 emissions, so I dare say it's a reasonable idea that people can measure CO2 emissions too - so that those who do not emit CO2 could get tax reductions. For example, a power station which liquifies their CO2 and pipes it to the bottom of the ocean might be granted a tax cut. The good thing about a carbon tax instead of the emissions trading scam is that a country can do it whether or not any other country does it. If New Zealand wants more CO2 so doesn't cut their emissions, then they will have to compete with countries which allow lower taxes on other products. So much energy is required on-site that it would not be possible for carbon-burning industry to simply relocate to NZ. Airliners would refuel at Dubai instead of at Beijing [if China demanded huge carbon taxes]. Aluminium smelters burning carbon would be based in low tax countries, though the one in Iceland and the one in NZ do not use carbon combustion for energy [geothermal and hydroelectric respectively]. Mqurice