How Much Would Cap and Trade Cost?

TIME’s energy and environment writer Bryan Walsh takes a look:

In a preliminary look at the American Power Act—the climate legislation that has been put forward by Senators John Kerry and Joseph Lieberman—the CBO found that the bill would actually reduce the budget deficit by about $19 billion over the 2011 to 2020 period. The CBO estimates that auctions of carbon allowances under the bill—which requires companies to essentially pay for the right to emit carbon dixoide—would raise government revenue by about $751 billion, more than bill would hike government spending through incentives for nuclear power, tax credits for energy efficiency and research and technology for new energy.

[snip]

Fred Krupp—the president of the Environmental Defense Fund and a fierce warrior for a carbon cap—told reporters last week that Kerry-Lieberman as it stands now is unlikely to ever reach a vote, and that green groups need to be open to a less ambitious bill, such as one that only caps emissions from power utilities. How much will that cost? The CBO hasn’t done an analysis—because there’s been no bill written—but on his blog Michael Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations has written that a utility-only cap could have fewer sources of revenue because the carbon market itself would be much smaller than with an economy-wide cap. It’d be ironic if, in trying to craft a climate bill that is less ambitious and costs less, the Senate actually produces one that’s a greater drain on the budget. But maybe we shouldn’t be surprised. It is the Senate, after all.

As they say, read the whole thing.

Related Topics: CBO, Congress, Senate
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • newfreedomblog

    How Much Would Cap and TAX Cost?
    .
    Wow, the better question might be where to begin?
    .
    Cap n’ Tax, not to be confused with the sugary cereal called Capn’ Crunch is a proposed bill by Kerry and Lieberman which will drive up the cost of your electricity bill as our dear Leader said….

    ““Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

    .
    Yes Ladies and Gentlemen you have heard it here first, not 10%, not even 20%, not even 50%……we are talking SKYROCKETING rates for our electricity.
    .

    .
    Just in case we get a few of our liberal naysayers, the proof is as they say now-a-days is in the video in his own words which are unmistakeable.
    .
    Even Fannie and Freddie, both bankrupt (oh you didn’t know, yes both of these companies are now in receivership, guess TIME.com hasn’t heard it either since there hasn’t been anything written about it at all) have bought the technology to sell the “carbon credits”. In essense these are not goods or services of any kind. Carbon credits are fictional papers identifying air, I will call them “caps” for lack of a better word. Then to buy these caps so a business will stay in business, the Government will issue them which is really a tax. As a tax, the businesses which are polluting will simply pass that cost over to the consumer. Now there will also be created this great big Chicago commodities trading center soley for the sale and purchase of these “caps”.
    .
    Someone is going to buy caps, and sell them to the businesses. Some will be bought and simply traded just like the oil they are trying to get rid of today.
    .
    I bet you are wondering who is involved in this scheme? Environmentalists? Well, one in particular. Al Gore. Good ole buddy Al, the “sex poodle” has about a 10% stake in it. Oh, who else you ask? Well Goldman Sachs. Oh yea, THAT Goldman Sachs. Timothy Geitners buddys at Goldman Sachs. Paulson, Mr CEO of Goldman. Yup, him too. Mr I will bail out Wall Street with billion upon billions of US Tax Payer dollars. Do you think he put most of it into the new Carbon Credit Exchange? You betcha!!!
    .
    Then you have the Apollo Alliance, SEIU, and all the rest of Obama’s buddies in Chicago. Any wonder the Carbon Credit Exchange will be located in Chicago? Perhaps because that is where we now trade most commodities, I believe it is so all the Obama buddies do not have to move out of Chicago. Kinda like Al Capone back in the day. He loved Chicago, and didn’t want the mob to move out of Chicago to Las Vegas. Well the mob stayed in Chicago.
    .
    I could go on and on, but why bother? TIME.com writes a FLUFF piece on Cap n’ Tax to extoll the virtures of this rip off of the century scheme perpetrated on the American people, but for some reason they left out all that stuff I have written about. Wonder why. You don’t suppose TIME.com also has a stake in it do you? Hey Adam, is TIME.com part of this new CCX?

  • kevin

    Hey Rusty,
    .
    Did you vote for McCain-Palin in 2008? If so, you voted for a cap-and-trade ticket.
    .
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1N3cxhPVIxc/Slxl0woWUBI/AAAAAAAABas/sm3aC_BYDgc/s1600-h/mccain+palin+env+jpg2.jpg
    .
    Cap and trade is a Republican idea, dreamed up by C. Boyden Gray in the first Bush White House. George W. Bush embraced the idea, and McCain-Palin campaigned on it.
    .
    But now that Obama has embraced it, your propaganda masters have convinced you all that this wholly conservative idea is radical socialism. And you gullible idiots lap it up.

  • kevin

    In case you don’t click on the link:
    .

    McCain-Palin on Climate Change
    .
    John McCain and Sarah Palin will establish a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas emissions, mobilize innovative technologies, and strengthen the economy. They will work with our international partners to secure our energy future, create opportunities for American industry, and leave a better future for our children.
    .
    They have proposed a cap-and-trade system that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions while encouraging the development of low-cost compliance options. A climate cap-and-trade mechanism would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions and allow entities to buy and sell rights to emit, similar to the successful acid rain trading program of the early 1990s. The key feature of this mechanism is that it allows the market to decide and encourage the lowest-cost compliance options.
    .
    A cap-and-trade system harnesses human ingenuity in the pursuit of alternatives to carbon-based fuels. Market participants are allotted total permits equal to the cap on greenhouse gas emissions. If they can invent, improve, or acquire a way to reduce their emissions, they can sell their extra permits for cash. The profit motive will coordinate the efforts of venture capitalists, corporate planners, entrepreneurs,
    and environmentalists around the common goal of reducing emissions.
    .
    To support the cap-and-trade system, a McCain-Palin Administration will promote the innovation,development, and deployment of advanced technologies. They will reform federal government research funding and infrastructure to support the cap-and-trade emissions reduction goals and emphasize the commercialization of low-carbon technologies.

    .
    Cap and trade is a conservative idea. It happens to be a good one, which must be why the right is running away from it now.

  • kevin

    The origins of cap-and-trade — the George H.W. Bush administration, the last sane Republican administration.
    .
    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Presence-of-Mind-Blue-Sky-Thinking.html

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I took one environmental economics class in 1992 around the time that the evidence of greenhouse gas causing climate change was becoming overwhelmingly conclusive compared to just something being studied in the 1960s and 1970s.
    .
    A huge majority of the class was about what is now called Cap and Trade, which, by then, was at least a five year old plan.
    .
    It is market friendly since the market will determine (rather than the government) who will emit an environmentally tolerable about of greenhouse gasses and the rest will simply seek new technologies or go without.
    .
    Unfortunately we have neanderthals in this country who do not believe proven facts are important relative to how people FEEL about things and pretend climate change is a worldwide conspiracy involving 20,000 climatologists and hundreds of thousands of others all seeking to make sure Al Gore becomes a movie star.

  • yoshiattack

    Why don’t you guys understand that just because an idea came from the right it’s not necessarily a good idea? I know our track record is sterling, but really, you praise us too much.

  • megatronrises

    “Conspiracy” just has a glamorous ring of truthiness to it, doesn’t it?

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Totally OT but it’s not everyday that a tell-all autobiography is announced from . . . MARK TWAIN! It’d apparently been held until 100th anniversary of his death. Among the offerings:

    “There is one notable thing about our Christianity: bad, bloody, merciless, money-grabbing, and predatory. The invention of hell measured by our Christianity of today, bad as it is, hypocritical as it is, empty and hollow as it is, neither the deity nor his son is a Christian, nor qualified for that moderately high place. Ours is a terrible religion. The fleets of the world could swim in spacious comfort in the innocent blood it has spilled.”

    God bless him!

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/entertainment/july-dec10/twain_07-07.html

  • apr2563

    Amen and hallelujah!

  • Cliff

    I bet you are wondering who is involved in this scheme? Environmentalists? Well, one in particular. Al Gore. Good ole buddy Al, the “sex poodle” has about a 10% stake in it. Oh, who else you ask? Well Goldman Sachs.
    .
    Do you have any proof for this? I mean, it makes sense that Gore would be involved in a carbon exchange, but how do you know? Are these just more glue fume overdoses?
    .
    Also, the Chicago Climate Exchange already exists:
    .
    http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/
    .
    The date on the page says 2007.
    So you’re a little behind the curve on your conspiracies there, chief.

  • ricardo4max

    How much would cap and tax cost? It will cost our lives, our freedom and liberty, and our country. It is based on yet another false premise, a disguise to give the left more power and long lasting control over our govt and our citizens.
    In addition, another great lie emanates from Washington DC. Remember any other legislation that was passed and we were told how much much it would cost or how much it would save and it has turned out to be far from the truth? The CBO is part of the regime and does it bidding by providing whatever propaganda it is asked to provide. We already have the proof of this.

  • 3xfire3

    “the CBO found that the bill would actually reduce the budget deficit by about $19 billion over the 2011 to 2020 period. The CBO estimates that auctions of carbon allowances under the bill—which requires companies to essentially pay for the right to emit carbon dixoide—would raise government revenue by about $751 billion”
    .
    So lets get this streight. We will save $19 Billion over 10 years and it’s only going to cost American tax payers [ the 50% of us that actually pay income taxes] $751 billion in new taxes.
    .
    Sounds like a bargan to me. Liberals really know how to make things work.
    .
    What they don’t understand is that when you increase costs for businesses through taxes or increased regulations, those costs get passed along to the consumers in the form of incresed prices.
    .
    But maybe we can call this Income Redistribution. Liberals like that.
    .
    I just remembered Kerry graduated from Harvard with a lower GPA then GW Bush.
    .
    Maybe that’s why this stuff makes no sense.

  • nflfoghorn

    You must think revenues are courtesy of the Tooth Fairy.

  • jsfox

    You might want to try supporting these assertions with some facts. Right now it sounds more like the fevered rant of Glenn Beck.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    It’d be ironic if, in trying to craft a climate bill that is less ambitious and costs less, the Senate actually produces one that’s a greater drain on the budget. But maybe we shouldn’t be surprised. It is the Senate, after all.
    -
    We didn’t get a deficit-reducing public option in health insurance reform, either. The GOP cares more about whipping its base into an irrational lather than about engaging with any policy issues facing the country. (See also Mitt Romney’s militant, militantly ignorant column about START from the other day).

  • 3xfire3

    nflfoghorn,
    .
    Let’s take $751 Billion from our citizens, in the form of increased prices on their purchases, to generate $19 Billion of savings over 10 years during a time of major economic problems in our country and the world.
    .
    Can you explain to me how this makes sense?

  • kevin

    How much would cap and tax cost? It will cost our lives, our freedom and liberty, and our country.
    .
    Calm down, drama queen.
    .
    And it’s not happening in your country, Brit. It’s happening in America.

  • kevin

    Here’s the CBO’s take, 3x:
    .

    The Congressional Budget Office, the independent number-crunching group in Congress, has the newest study that analyzes the specifics of the Waxman-Markey bill. It says the net annual economywide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion — or about $175 per household. It’s important to read the fine print on this one, though. The CBO says the cost will vary depending on your wealth. Low-income consumers could expect to save $40 a year, while high-income consumers will see a net cost for energy of $235 to $340 annually.

    .
    So the average cost to consumers will be a whopping $15 a month. Oh no.
    .
    http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jun/25/your-guide-cap-and-trade/

  • jsfox

    What you don’t seem to understand:

    CBO estimates that auctions of carbon allowances under the bill —which requires companies to essentially pay for the right to emit carbon dixoide—would raise government revenue by about $751 billion

    So the revenue comes from the auctions not taxes. But hey don’t let the facts get in the way of your rant.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    Yes, it is true that sometimes some threats are exaggerated for political or economic gain.
    .
    Vitamins and/or medications sometimes – sometimes – are over sold by exaggerating the threats of going without them.
    .
    In politics, the military strength of foreign enemies is exaggerated to get hard core cold warriors (and yes, some were Democrats) elected. It, also, made a fortune for the military industrial complex. In that case the number of Soviet missiles were one third of the number we thought there were.
    .
    How about climate change, who looses money or gains money from it? Oil companies will loose money. Needing to redesign cars, car manufacturers loose money. Manufacturers of all products which use fuel or electricity needing to redesign their products loose money. Standing on a podium on a 90 degree day mayors, governors and other politicians loose votes when they ask people to walk more or turn down their air conditioners. Who gains? Well, a couple of guys here and there making documentaries make a tiny bit of money (relatively speaking).
    .
    So, is the threat likely to be manufactured for political and/or economic gain? Absolutely not! Is it likely, instead, to be played down for political and economic gain? Absolutely! Climate change is, likely, significantly worse than most of wish to believe – not more minor. Every vote for cap and trade is an honest elected official going somewhat (depending upon their district) out on a limb risking their career, not improving it.
    .
    Sorry Recardo. You’ve got it backwards, as usual.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    3X,
    .
    I know all about how great you say you are at running one particular business. Assuming it is totally true and un-exaggerated, I say that is wonderful.
    .
    However, just as you would not take a college professor, a doctor, a person with a totally unrelated business background a congressman (Democratic or Republican) with no related experience take over the company you ran and expect them to do what you did since they have totally different experiences, why do you trust your own random guesses about the environment and not listen to those who study it their entire lives and believe them.
    .
    I do not have a background in physics to create a mathematical proof that gravity exists, but, I trust that those who have studied gravity are correct and do not attempt to fly.
    .
    I, also, unlike you, trust climatologists with the study of the climate and environmental economist (a sub section of economics) to calculate the costs of doing nothing.
    .
    When these people present clear cases that the cost of not decreasing greenhouse gasses would be astronomical, even though it is not my favorite thing to have an energy efficient air conditioner or a smaller car, I pay attention to experts and consider their solutions.
    .
    You, apparently, believe that since you are highly skilled in running one particular business that you know more about climatology, economics and everything else than everybody else as well.
    .
    Sir, nobody can figure these things out without extensive study. Nobody is likely to be highly skilled in all of these fields.
    .
    Relax and pay $15 more per year.
    .
    If you’re really running short, give me a post office box to send it to and I can send you that $15 a year. Hell, I’d give ten more yeas – $150 – if it would get you and your conservatives to stop crying about how cleaning up the environment is not free.

  • newfreedomblog

    “Blackburn then asked the $100 million question: “Is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?” Gore gave the stock answer that “the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it but every penny that I have made I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge.”

    .
    Ask and you shall receive, Mr cliff.
    .
    One only needs to follow the money trail on this, and it points directly at the current Administration, Al Gore, Goldman Sachs, and Obama’s croonies in Washington.
    .
    CCX is being traded, and was founded in 2007. But it doesn’t stop there my friend. CCX is also infiltrated by other known global warming extremists and “spread the wealth” activists from Obama’s own close circle of friends.
    .
    Gore’s “Alliance” is together with Franklin Raines, the former CEO of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, who purchased the technology to run the exchange, Joel Roger’s who is also a party in all of this comes with the plan for “green jobs” from the perspective of an activist, who will use Global Warming and Climate Change which is nothing but a farce, and use it to essentially take over the economy by passing this legislation to attack those businesses who will not playball with them. Check out Roger’s Emerald Cities, and the various groups who are aligned with him.
    .
    You can add Van Jones and the rest of the Obama croonies into the mix and you have CCX.
    .
    For those who are interested, see this video on the truth of “Climate Change and Global Warming”. It is a direct assult on the environmentalist who do not have the scientific research to back up their claims, but then again what else is new in the liberal world. If the words do not fit, change them. If the science doesn’t match up to the models, well fudge the numbers. It is nothing but a bunk / junk science, and the American people are going to pay for it to make the likes of Al Gore’s of the liberal movement rich men.
    .

    .
    Simply ask yourself why Al Gore’s wealth has gone up exponentially, from about 2 million in 1999, to well over 200 million today. Enough to buy his ocean front, 9 million dollar mansion. If he was so concerned about all the melting ice bergs, why would you buy ocean front property?

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I’m sorry 3X,
    .
    I could send you, out of my sense of charity, $150 for ten months of increased costs. I am not going to send you ten years worth of money, but, maybe I can start a charity for conservative millionaires (as you claim to be a millionaire) who have chronic insomnia about increased electric bills and higher gasoline prices.
    .
    Then, again, maybe it would be more cost effective to give insomniac conservatives therapy for their misplaced fear in government rather than very justifiable concerns of environmental disaster.
    .
    Maybe George Soros can help you conservative millionaires out. He gives to charity and, relative to him, most millionaires are charity cases.

  • 3xfire3

    Only Liberals in their dream world could think your going to charge businesses $715 Billon Dollars and their not going to increase their prices to consumers to cover their increased costs..
    .
    Let me say this slowly for you Liberals.
    ,
    1. Our Government is going to charge businesses $715 Billion Dollars to acquire Carbon Credits.

    2. This will increase the Operating Costs of these businesses by $715 Billion Dollars.

    3. These businesses must pass this increase in operating cost on to the consumers.

    4. They will accomplish this by increasing prices to consumers to cover their increased cost related to purchasing Carbon Credits.

    What don’t you Liberals understand? There is no free lunch.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    3X,
    .
    Nobody is claiming that the $22 Billion will not be passed onto consumers 3X.
    .
    But $22 Billion divided by 300 million people is only about $73.33 per person per year.
    .
    Per capita GDP is about $47,000 per year.
    .
    The environmental impact of doing nothing so outweighs this that anybody who is not mathematically impaired would approve of this.

  • 3xfire3

    Patrick,
    .
    It’s not $20 Billion that will be passed on to consumers. It’s $715 Billion.
    .
    That’s a big difference.
    .
    It is a FACT that this will cause major havoc to American Industry which is already at a competitive disadvantage to many other parts of the world.
    .
    It’s only a Hope that some how green jobs in the USA will offset these major losses.
    That Hope may not be true and Cap and Trade could actually drive our country deeper into disaster.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “The CBO estimates that auctions of carbon allowances under the bill—which requires companies to essentially pay for the right to emit carbon dixoide—would raise government revenue by about $751 billion, more than bill would hike government spending through incentives for nuclear power, tax credits for energy efficiency and research and technology for new energy.”
    .
    $751B/9 years = 83.4444444B
    83.4444444B/ 300M = $278.14
    .
    Sorry, the question you are asking is if our citizens can afford $278.14 out of about $46,000.
    .
    Yes.
    .
    Comfortably.

  • 3xfire3

    Patrick,
    .
    So for a family of 4 we are talking approx $1,112.56 of after tax money per year.
    .
    If we assume 35% Fed., State, Local taxes, that’s approx $1,668.84 of before tax money per year for nine years.
    .
    As I said.
    .
    It is a FACT that Cap and Trade will cause major havoc to American Industry which is already at a competitive disadvantage to many other parts of the world. This would probably lead to lots of job losses.
    .
    It’s only a Hope that some how green jobs in the USA will offset these major losses.
    That Hope may not be come true and Cap and Trade could actually drive our country deeper into disaster.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    The National Median income per household (including unmarried people, etc) is $44,389.
    .
    There are 2.59 people per household. $278.14 multiplied by 2.59 = $720.38
    .
    $720.38/$44,389 = 1.62%
    .
    Can our economy handle that?
    .
    Yes.
    .
    3X, do you own a calculator?
    .
    Until this entry I didn’t need one, but, I knew the numbers were tiny. The cost of additional floods, hurricanes, crop failures due to drought, flood, heat waves and cold snaps are far greater than this.
    .
    Why are you so obsessively worried about the government being out to get you?

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    3X,
    .
    How much would it cost if the Maumee River flooded Toledo?
    .
    If the chances of that can be greatly reduced for less than 2% of the average household’s income, wouldn’t you be thankful?

  • pittsburghpoet

    Being anti-Christian means that you cut yourself off from some people who support things you would find good. Saying “Christians are evil” cuts you off from a vast and wide tradition, including Dorothy Day and Catherine Booth, St. Vincent de Paul and Count Zinzendorf, as well as many people living today.

blog comments powered by Disqus