California’s Cap-And-Trade Carbon Emission System May Be Failing


TN Note: Proponents must wonder why cap and trade program keep failing. The main reason is that cap and trade is economically and morally bankrupt before it even opens its doors for business. It is a sham business that has no demand, no products and virtually no regulation. It reminds me of a post office scam in the late 1970s where someone put an ad in the paper that merely said, “Send $5 to P.O. Box 4837, city, state” and some people actually did so. 

California’s much-vaunted cap-and-trade system of reducing greenhouse gas emissions may be collapsing.

This month’s quarterly auction of carbon dioxide emission allowances, which was supposed to generate more than a half-billion dollars for politicians to spend, brought in a paltry $10 million as the Air Resources Board sold a tiny fraction of the allowances it was offering.

It could be a one-time adjustment, of course, but those who study the complex market believe that the underlying conditions are more systemic than situational, the most prominent being an increasing concern that the program will expire in 2020.

When the Legislature passed the enabling legislation a decade ago, it was aimed at reducing carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, not only through selling a declining number of allowances at rising prices, but through more specific targets, particularly increasing the level of renewable electric power generation.

There’s a fierce, albeit mostly private, debate over whether the cap-and-trade system can legally exist after 2020, or would have to be reauthorized by the Legislature. Meanwhile, there’s a pending lawsuit, filed by business groups, that seeks to have the system branded a tax, which would require a two-thirds legislative vote.

Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration contends, most recently this week in testimony to a legislative committee, that cap and trade can continue without reauthorization, but it’s by no means a settled issue. And it may be moot if the market is, as it appears, imploding.

Moreover, were reauthorization sought, it could run afoul of a 2010 ballot measure that tightened up the legal definitions of taxes and fees and therefore could be, politically, a nonstarter.

If the system is, indeed, falling apart, the emission reduction goals themselves are not affected. In fact, the sharp decline in emission allowance sales indirectly tightens up the cap. The impact is mostly financial – slowing or even blocking plans by Brown and legislators to spend what they thought would be billions of dollars that they wouldn’t have to raise though direct taxes.

Read full story here…

Related Articles That You Might Like

Leave a Reply

2 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
Giovanniabitante.ComPatrick Woodm88 Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Do you mind if I quote a few of your posts as long as I provide credit and
sources back to your site? My blog site is in the exact same niche as yours and my visitors would really benefit from a lot of
the information you provide here. Please let me know if this okay with you.
Thank you!

Patrick Wood

Reposting is always ok if you provide a link back to the correct content page on Technocracy.News.

Follow Technocracy.News?

The only Authoritative source for

Exposing Technocracy

Stories curated daily from around the world

Subscribe and get the digest!

No SPAM! We will not share your email with any 3rd party.

Thank You for Subscribing!


If you don't receive a confirmation email within a few

minutes, please check  your spam/junk folder.

Wath for a confirmation email.