Comments on: Dear Hearing Witness, would you mind not selling our future?

By: Peter Wood

Peter Wood — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:38:04 +0000

Approximately 17.1% of permits will be allocated for free to polluting industries. While having no free permits for polluters would be better, the Waxman-Markey bill is far better in terms of permit allocation than can and trade schemes in other countries. How permits are allocated does not effect the amount of emissions, the amount of emissions is determined by the cap, and the reserve price when permits are auctioned. But there is an opportunity cost associated with allocating permits to polluters.

Under Waxman-Markey, 1-4% of permits will be allocated for funding of international adaptation; 1-4% will be allocated for funding international low emissions technology. What is needed in terms of permit allocation is for these figures to be much higher — then we might even get an international agreement.

By: morgan

morgan — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 00:29:38 +0000

Working on sending some very personal and heartfelt emails right now. And planning on being in line at 6am so that the people who are paid to wait in line by lobbyists don’t take all the spots. see you all tomorrow

By: Ben Wessel

Ben Wessel — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:23:48 +0000

Here’s my letter:

Hello Mr. Keohane,

My name is Ben Wessel and I’m a 20-year-old student and a dedicated climate advocate. I have been following the progress of the Waxman-Markey climate bill for quite some time and I am a little worried about the direction in which it’s heading. While I applaud the representatives of USCAP and Chairmen Markey and Waxman for their ability to compromise in order to get emissions reducing policy through the Energy and Commerce Committee, it seems to me that some of the crucial tenets of science-based and equitable climate policy have been left by the wayside. I believe, along with many other advocates, economists, policymakers and even the President, that 100% auction of emissions permits is essential to guarantee the most efficient and just policy to control carbon pollution.

Tomorrow you will testify about auction allowances. I strongly urge you to use this position to point out that, while politics is surely “the art of the possible,” justice and the American taxpayer are not negotiable. It is inevitable that compromises will be made in the policymaking process, but as an environmental advocate I feel it is your duty to stand up for the principles upon which your organization was built: “to create innovative, equitable and cost-effective solutions to society’s most urgent environmental problems” (http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=370). Please know that, as someone who will be living with the ramifications of the decisions you help make tomorrow for the most of this century, I am counting on you to speak up about our responsibility to future generations.

I look forward to hearing you talk tomorrow and will hopefully have an opportunity to meet you after you give your testimony with the other young people in attendance.

Thank you so much,
Ben