Cap-and-trade debate: Ameren says process would cost consumers; supporters justify - Two rather unlikely sources recently came together to educate people on the theory of cap and trade and its controversial legislation.

The scientists who created the report that claims anthopogenic GHG emissions are the main cause of climate change did not follow scientific processes, effectively putting the whole conclusion in question.  So now we are talking consensus science rather than proven fact but the media virtually never talks with scientists who disagree with the results of the IPCC report.

There have been estimates in some of the articles I have read that say the implementation of cap-and-trade will increase the costs of electrical power about 80%, particularly if it involves installation of carbon capture and sequestration equipment on the flues of fossil-fired power plants.  How can a country in recession support such moves?  Does no one realize the power producers will have to pass that cost on to stay in business?  What happens with the low income families who are already struggling to pay their bills?  I can pretty much guaranty there will be a push to use a portion of cap and trade generated revenues to subsidize those who cannot pay.  So the cap and trade fees will be tweaked upward a bit to make up for that.  Doing so puts more burden on those still paying their bills.  It means businesses that will just give up.  It means increased prices for goods and services for those still making enough to pay their bills. Increased prices lower demand for those goods and services which means lost jobs.  Can you see the spiral getting bigger?

Grow the economy so people prosper.  When we are prosperous again, we will voluntarily support green technologies.