Re: [asa] Have Global Warming Alarmist Appeasers Jumped the

On 4/11/07, PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Shark, yet?
> Sender: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> Precedence: bulk
>
> Next person to jump the shark: Gingrich

Some random comments. Newt has some good ideas and having someone on the
right promoting this is good. I am also not surprised. This is classic Newt.
An interesting thing about the way Newt framed this is that somehow what he
is advocating hadn't been proposed before. Because the problem is so large
and there is no silver bullet we need to apply everything we can on this.
So, go ahead and have prizes and credits but it doesn't also mean that you
can't have cap and trade or other solutions. If I'm wrong and what Newt
proposes is sufficient then the carbon market crashes and it will be the
equivalent of not having cap and trade at all. If I am right, though, then
what he proposes if it is all that is done is a disaster. What Newt proposed
and what his debate partner proposed are complementary. I also found it
funny when the debate partner brought up that Newt voted for the acid rain
cap and trade. If what Newt is proposing was not contradictory with cap and
trade then, it's not now.

As for the details, I am probably just as skeptical about R&D tax credits as
David O. is on cap and trade. We've had such credits since the Reagan
Administration and they really haven't done squat. Now I'm an engineer and
I'm all for R&D spending because it keeps me employed. I would be naturally
biased for them if they worked, but they don't. The underlying problem is
that the government really stinks at picking winners. Take the hybrid tax
credit. This includes hybrid SUVs which has been recently shown haven't
helped much. See here: *http://tinyurl.com/247v53 *

Another poster advocated nuclear power and if it really made as much sense
as what she said then cap and trade will lead to a nuclear Renaissance as
they become more economically competitive with coal. The problem is that the
technology is "thirsty" and will not do well in arid regions and it takes
forever to build particularly with increased security costs post 9/11. I do
find it humorous that those who are concerned with climate change are marked
as anti-nuclear. In a recent pre-print Jim Hansen said, "Germany's intention
to replace nuclear power plants with coal is incompatible with climate
stabilization."

All in all this is a good thing. The science debate is over and the policy
debate has begun. It's a good thing to have as many people possible who are
seriously engaged in this debate rather than just grandstanding and throwing
bombs. Newt, welcome to the table.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Apr 11 17:27:49 2007