|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|09-16-2008 04:52 AM|
Lets just leave it on that good note then.
I appreciate the strong opposing viewpoint you presented on the other subjects.
|09-16-2008 04:44 AM|
Originally Posted by BoulderGT3 View Post
Ok well, is there a difference between NYMEX and ICE?
What one was first and who's rules did they have to follow for umpteen thousand years?
|09-15-2008 03:46 PM|
2. If the US limited itself that way, we would simply get out bid by others. I'll withhold the "who are you rooting for?" because I realize you just didn't understand the implications.
The last 2 paragraphs made sense.
|09-15-2008 03:40 PM|
I tried to make this point before.
Did you know that every night Home Depot changes lumber prices to reflect the market? We all need homes don't we? Let's put an end to that then!
Seems to me that everyone is a capitalist when it makes them money. When they start to loose money, suddenly they promote socialist ideals.
Same as the mortgages.
House doubles in value in 4 years! Yeah capitalism! Let's refinance, buy a boat and get new landscaping.
Value goes down, ARM kicks in! Help! Government bail out!
|09-15-2008 08:40 AM|
Once again, you fail to understand a world commodity.
|09-15-2008 02:18 AM|
Then it's good that you as the pivot boy, always have your mouth full.
No seriously though, that's a good question and one that I hadn't given much thought.
My solution would be to only allow the sale of oil here in the States that has been bought and sold on regulated exchanges with regulations similar to those that we had in the United States since the Great Depression.
Regulations keep the hacks out. We can see what deregulation during the 80's has done to our financial markets.
Really though, I think we might find common ground on agreeing that we simply need to reduce our useage of oil so that we are able to produce all our energy here. That way even if speculators still went unregulated, the money would at least stay here in the United States.
Look at what Roofeditor is doing!
|09-14-2008 10:11 PM|
Until you can do this, you should really just avoid this subject in it's entirety.
The old saying..."It is better to be quiet and thought an idiot............ than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." comes to mind.
|09-14-2008 09:24 PM|
Ha ha, No!
I was merely putting it into the context of a different situation and seeing if you would support a "Free Market" when it's more clear what damage can be caused by not actually thinking about the consequences before undoing protections that were put in place after the Great Depression.
Your Comic Book analogy doesn't work because I don't use Comic Books to heat my house unless of course speculators drive the price of oil and gas up that high again.
Is it fair to say that some things have to be managed for the Public good instead of for the benefit of private profit?
|09-14-2008 09:15 PM|
Hey Hey, you're the pivot boy.
I have been busy, I only have time for rants. I get tired of looking it up and parroting it back.
But of course I will look it up AGAIN and present my case AGAIN when time permits.
|09-14-2008 09:52 AM|
To Rick and Brian both!
For the sake of argument can we change CARBON credits to ENERGY credits?
Suppose CSX railroad in Jacksonville uses a lot of PEAK time energy and Solar or Wind power could offset a lot particularly the peak power which it really as if not more important than total energy use.
Now suppose CSX has all the tax credits they need for other reasons. Now here comes Richard with $400K to invest in Solar on the CSX building.
Here is how it works.
1. I do the install and put out the $400K.
2. Florida Power and light give the installer owner of the system a $130K grant.
3. The Federal government gives 30% tax CREDIT not a deduction. $120K This goes to me the installer.
4. The Federal government allows ME to depreciate the $400K over 5 years. $80K a year write off.
1. CSX gets the solar power and they get a LOCK in on their power rate for ever!
2. CSX also gets no PEAK power bills.
3. CSX gets to claim they are the good guy and all that.
Back to me the guy that put up the $400K.
1. The grant is mine, the $130K tax credit is mine, the $80K a year write off is also mine.
2. If I don't need all those write offs I can sell them, at a premium to someone that needs them.
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), also known as Green tags, Renewable Energy Credits, or Tradable Renewable Certificates (TRCs), are tradable environmental commodities in the United States which represent proof that 1 megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity was generated from an eligible renewable energy resource.
These certificates can be sold and traded and the owner of the REC can claim to have purchased renewable energy. While traditional carbon emissions trading programs promote low-carbon technologies by increasing the cost of emitting carbon, RECs can incentivize carbon-neutral renewable energy by providing a production subsidy to electricity generated from renewable sources. It is important to understand however, the energy associated with a REC is sold separately and is used by another party. So when you purchase a REC you get only a certificate.
In states which have a REC program, a green energy provider (such as a wind farm) is credited with one REC for every 1,000 kWh or 1 MWh of electricity it produces (for reference, an average residential customer consumes about 800 kWh in a month). A certifying agency gives each REC a unique identification number to make sure it doesn't get double-counted. The green energy is then fed into the electrical grid (by mandate), and the accompanying REC can then be sold on the open market
Compliance markets are created by a policy that exists in 25 U.S. states called Renewable Portfolio Standard. In these states, the electric companies are required to supply a certain percent of their electricity from renewable generators by a specified year. For example, in California the law is 20% renewable by 2010, whereas New York has a 24% requirement by 2013. There is a full listing of state renewable portfolio standards . Electric utilities in these states demonstrate compliance with their requirements by purchasing RECs - in the California example, the electric companies would need to hold RECs equivalent to 20% of their electricity sales.
Voluntary markets are ones where customers choose to buy renewable power, out of a desire to go green. Most corporate and household purchases of renewable energy are voluntary purchases. Renewable energy generators located in states that do not have a Renewable Portfolio Standard can sell their RECs to voluntary buyers, usually at a cheaper price than compliance market RECs.
To be honest even though we do this, my expertise is more on the technical end and for the tax end we have a CPA and Tax lawyer that does this. It's more complicated than a simple for it or against it.
|09-14-2008 07:41 AM|
Originally Posted by THEBUNDO View Post
It's a "social conscience tax" that benefits those who can manipulate the system.
In theory, it could work pretty well. If it actually resulted in a measurable reduction in carbon emissions by existing business' it would be a good thing. However, to pay me for not building a plant that I wasn't really going to build anyway................ is just silly.
|09-14-2008 07:30 AM|
|THEBUNDO||The whole carbon credit thing seems like a shell game to me, but maybe I just haven't figured it out|
|09-14-2008 06:53 AM|
Or are you just an address on a circle jerk e-mail list that feeds you this kind of dribble?
Either way.....if you can't prove it you should stop saying it.
|09-14-2008 02:53 AM|
Asking me if carbon credits should be sold through brokers and subject to free market or instead regulated heavily by the government is like asking if kiddy porn is better sold in video stores or just on the internet. The answer is no way no how! Comic books on the other hand they can sell however they wish.
I'm using an analogy, to make a point.
How can I discuss the "best way" to distribute carbon credits? They shouldn't exist, the whole idea is ridiculous. Any answer I give would be the wrong one.
Anyone agree with carbon credits? Try this. Pay some other dude to be faithful to your wife, while you go cheat on her. See how that works out.
You should get into politics.
|09-14-2008 12:40 AM|
It's a bit complex, but if you doubt what I am saying, then prove me wrong.
When the next President caves to the same Financial Institutions and goes to a "Cap and Trade" system for reducing carbon emissions, will you be ok with unregulated foreign investors purchasing the rights to emit carbon from the coal companies that generate our electricity, make our Cement and smelt our steel?
The "Carbon Credits" will become more valuable than the businesses that actually make the products that society needs and they will sell out and the United States will be left with ZERO industry and forced to buy EVERYTHING from China.
I am interested in the Survival and Prosperity of the United States, who are you rooting for?
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|