After a few extended discussions over the past several days, I find myself returning to the “we’re not having the debate we should be having” point — that is, while we continue to scuffle about on energy and climate issues with “should we act?”, we aren’t discussing “how should we act?”. The ultimate goal is to phase out fossil-carbon-based fuels and reduce the levels of atmospheric CO2, but the details of the numerous methods of doing so often elude folk.
Now, there’s a few idealistic, simple solutions that only really apply as utopian visions among lunatics or as straw-man arguments from opponents (even opponents who should know better). These include authoritarian all-out bans and libertarian Invisible Hand Free Market Fairy suggestions, for instance. No one that I know of in the western world is calling for a ban (it just isn’t realistic), and though several wingnuts in the US are seriously calling for deregulation, it isn’t gaining traction. The murkier mixed-market solutions are seriously being discussed (whenever our elected officials get around to it…) but are harder for lay folk to understand and thus easy prey for spin.
Consider this a very, very brief introduction to the three major mixed-market carbon pricing systems. It’s not very in-depth, nor is it referencing any particular bill — this is just an introduction. See below the fold.
