Several states, the U.S. Government and the EU set pollution standards that industry must meet or face fines. They’ve also developed systems whereby high-pollution operations may buy credits from other companies that meet the standards. In theory this motivates companies to become more efficient so that they can make additional funds by selling their credits. I’m skeptical.
Now comes TerraPass for consumers. This is a system (or maybe a scheme) by which people buy TerraPasses for the estimated amount of pollution they create from their cars. These funds are then used to finance greenhouse gas abatement programs, clean fuel generation and industrial efficiency inititives. I’m still skeptical.
Both of these approaches rely on the “Invisible Hand” of the free market to lead to cleaner air. I’m not sure I trust the market to do so. Can private enterprise lead to clean air or is stronger regulation and harsher punishment for violators the answer?
An essential component of these market-based systems is a government-set cap or target for total emmissions for a specific pollutant. Ideally, the target is lower than the status quo, and can be lowered over time. Lowering the target generally causes the market price of the poolution credit to rise, increasing the incentive to reduce emmissions. Wikipedia has a pretty good synopsis here. I think that programs such as these are a great way to address some industrial pollution issues.
Cecil tackled this concept here with a rather favorable treatment.
What sort of harsher punishment are you proposing? Basically, you can take someone’s money or their freedom. If you propose to jail corporate officers for pollution, that’s a pretty huge step, and vastly different than how we treat most corporate misdeeds. If you take their money, then how does it differ from having them buy pollution credits to be in compliance?
The nice thing about the free market angle is that if one company pollutes more, they buy up more credits, and makes polluting more expensive for everyone else. That provides incentive to other companies to reduce emissions. Fines against one company do not affect other companies at all, no additional incentive to reduce when emissions go up elsewhere.
It’s worked well in the past in limiting Sulfiric Acid levels in the US, and I belive the Kyoto Protocal involves a similar system with CO[sub]2[/sub]. I hope, and think, that the US will end up with a CO[sub]2[/sub] trading system sometime in the next decade or so. There’s already been some efforts in the senate.
I don’t know how well this TerraPass thing would work, but it sounds like it’s worth a try. Perhaps some large W coast state known for it’s amenity to environmental regulations that is having revenue problems would be willing to try it out.
One problem with this.
yeah, its great for the guy with a brand new ULEV (ultra-low emissions vehicle) from Honda or some other efficient subcompact car, but what about the migrant family living in their 25 yo Ford van with an out-of-tune v8 spewing all kinds of filth into the air, cuz they cant afford to do anything other than fill it with gas and occaisionally change the oil?
Special variances for family size, income, and variable emissions standards for older vehicles?