Tag Archive for 'greenhouse gases'

First ever GHG fees approved by Bay Area Regulators

Published
by
malagent
on May 21, 2008
in Climate, Critical Thinking, Current Events, Environment, Global Warming, Law and News
. 2 Comments

BusinessWeek and others are reporting that the “First Ever” fees I wrote about earlier today have been approved by Bay Area regulators.

Air pollution regulators in the San Francisco Bay area have voted overwhelmingly to approve new rules that impose fees on businesses for emitting greenhouse gasses.

A spokeswoman for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District says the agency’s board of directors voted 15-1 on Wednesday to charge companies 4.4 cents per ton of they emit.

Experts say the fees, which cover nine counties in the Bay Area, are the first of their kind in the country.

This sets a very dangerous precedent. The regulation not only considers to be “pollution”, but it also calculates fees based on CDE ( equivalent) and on GWP ( Potential). Continue reading ‘First ever GHG fees approved by Bay Area Regulators’

Global Warming Fees Coming to California?

Published
by
malagent
on May 21, 2008
in Climate, Critical Thinking, Current Events, Economy, Environment, Global Warming and News
. 2 Comments

It looks like the are going to start soon…

San Francisco: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District will vote today on a proposal to impose a Greenhouse Gas Fee. The fee applies to () equivalent emissions at the rate of 4.4¢(USD) per metric ton and is expected to initially produce an additional $1.1 million for the District.[1]

It’s all part of a plan that “would increase revenue to enable the District to address increasing regulatory program activity costs, and continue to move toward more complete cost recovery”[1]

Chart of GWP CDE from BAAQMDThe BAAQMD’s website describes “Environmental Justice” (emphasis mine)

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District is committed to environmental policymaking and enforcement practices that are fair and equitable to all residents regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location in order to protect against the health effects of air pollution. [2]

The way the proposal is set up it could effect a lot more than and the other listed . Consider that water vapor is the most powerful . I’m not sure what the “ equivalent” or “ potential” of water vapor is but, imagine a “carbon tax” based on the steam from showers or cooking.

Interestingly the supporters of this measure seem to be concerned with the precedent it will set than with the actual impact it would have on the .

The modest fee — 4.4 cents per ton of — probably won’t be enough to force companies to reduce their emissions, but backers say it sets an important precedent in combating change and could serve as a model for regional air districts nationwide.

“It doesn’t solve , but it gets us thinking in the right terms,” said Daniel Kammen, a renewable expert at the University of California, Berkeley. “It’s not enough of a cost to change behavior, but it tells us where things are headed. You have to think not just in financial terms, but in carbon terms.” [3]

  1. Final Staff Report and Draft Amendments to Regulation 3: http://www.baaqmd.gov/pln/ruledev/3/2008/0300_sr&dr_052008.pdf
  2. BAAQMD.goc - Environmental Justice: http://www.baaqmd.gov/pio/environmental_justice/index.htm
  3. Regulators in California to vote on global warming fees charged to businesses for emissions, International Herald Tribune, May 21, 2008: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/21/america/NA-GEN-US-Global-Warming-Fees.php

Reuters: What happened to Global Warming?

Published
by
malagent
on May 16, 2008
in Climate, Critical Thinking, Current Events, Environment, Global Warming, Media, Media Bias and News
. 1 Comment

Gerard Wynn, over at asks “What happened to ?”

It’s not just that it’s disappeared from headlines this year - shoved off by the credit crunch and natural disasters, for example. It can’t be ignored that 2007 came and went as another very warm year - the 7th hottest on record since 1850 according to the World Meteorological Organization.

But it wasn’t a record. In fact that was 1998, a full 10 years ago - the year of an exceptional El Nino, a Pacific weather pattern which heats the whole globe. So is not living up to the hype?

Two weeks ago Leibniz Institute’s Noel Keenlyside stirred an academic hornet’s
nest by saying that we may have to wait longer - a decade or more - for another
peak year, because a natural weakening in ocean currents may be cooling sea
temperatures.

Many scientists flatly rejected the idea, saying Keenlyside had over-estimated the effect. But some pointed out that a recent switch in a weather pattern called the North Atlantic Oscillation could indeed cool temperatures globally.

Along with the gratuitous photograph of floating ice, this author actually covered a little of the other side. Well one paragraph anyway.

Meanwhile one or two doubters are already saying the present lull in warming
casts doubt on just how far manmade are influencing the . MIT’s Richard Lindzen reckoned that if it was as bad as all that temperatures would be rising faster.

What do you think?

Well, what do you think? You could always comment here, there, or both.