The fact that most of the left embraces cap-and-trade should not blind us to the fact that cap-and-trade is a classic example of an indirect, overly complicated, "market friendly" neoliberal approach, touted originally by conservatives and neoliberals as an alternative to the allegedly discredited "top-down, command-and-control" approach that gave us, among other things, the TVA, the Manhattan Project and the Internet.
Just a gentle reminder to my readers about the roots and realities of cap-and-trade. Not that it matters for the immediate, and likely distant, future; reports out of Senator Reid's office are indicating that Senate Democrats will separate any climate legislation from a now very limited oil spill response bill, that will also maybe possibly sort of contain some nice energy efficiency regulations. What, besides a cap, is missing? Just about everything, including any attempt at an RPS or subsidies/tax incentives for clean tech, let alone the much-needed energy tech innovation funding. At best, this bill gets us a band-aid for our tragically porous carbon infrastructure and maybe adds a slight kick of momentum towards continual Congressional debate on energy in the fall.
Now that Republicans, some Democrats and all environmental journalists have turned declaring the death of cap-and-trade into a hobby, let's think about why it was doomed in the first place. Cap-and-trade is a conservative policy, championed by Democrats and scorned by Republicans- a political fustercluck from the get-go. Its intended purpose is to make dirty fuels more expensive, ostensibly punishing consumers for using energy OR internalizing to society the full cost of the carbon economy, depending on your point-of-view. The most politically palatable form of such a program would probably have been cap-and-dividend, wherein the revenues accrued from the carbon price would be returned to ratepayers...which basically creates a small-to-huge financial and regulatory infrastructure to move money around while making it more expensive for consumers to work, live and consume. It would also have likely encouraged modest investment in some of the more mature clean energy technologies, but fallen far short of delivering the technological breakthroughs we need to decarbonize the economy - solar, wind, advanced battery technology, carbon capture, small modular nuclear reactors, et cetera. Another politically feasible, and my favorite, form would have directed carbon revenues towards clean tech innovation - polls always show overwhelming support for such policies - but that's a pretty moot point now anyway.
My point is, the heretofore failed effort to install a cap-and-trade into the American economy became a battle. A battle between Republicans and Democrats, between voters and politicians, between environmentalists and everybody else. "You can't win a war if you refuse to fight," an energy blogger opined earlier today on Twitter, directing his complaints towards President Obama and Senator Reid. But as I have said before, I do not believe that we will achieve the social, technological and legal breakthroughs required to decarbonize the economy unless we approach the challenge as a nation of driven, innovative, and competitive collaborators. My response to the above tweet was that we must stop calling the effort to [save the planet, reform our energy infrastructure, achieve energy independence, make clean energy cheap, etc.] a war, and start calling it a quest. As indicated in the above quotation from Michael Lind, Americans have done extraordinary things before when we approach technological, social and legal shortfalls as a nation united for a common purpose. We didn't find success in massive endeavors like the TVA, the Manhattan Project and the Internet by inventing complicated and expensive systems to end old behavior, but by finding innovative and brilliant methods to chart a new course to our future. The tactic of cap-and-trade proponents became one of excuses and apologies, not of inspiration and empowerment. This, moreso than the short-term political failures of Obama and Reid, proved the downfall of cap-and-trade.
No comments:
Post a Comment