Chicago Climate Exchange = FAIL, Now California opens “Pacific Carbon Exchange”

UPDATE: related story shows what can happen when emissions trading doesn’t have proper checks and balances – Carbon trading tempts firms to make greenhouse gas

California hasn’t learned from the failure of the Chicago Climate Exchange this year, when a ton of Carbon traded for a mere 5 cents. Nobody wanted to buy it even at that ridiculously low price. But, like a zombie, carbon trading rises again in brain dead broken California.

final day on CCX - click to enlarge

Now the the AB32 madness begins, and PCarbX (which sounds like some over the counter antacid remedy) is the new trading scheme. I give it two years, max. Here’s the story from the San Francisco Chronicle.

California poised to enter carbon-trading market

Andrew S. Ross

Today could be seen as the biggest day yet for California’s climate change law, assuming, as expected, the state Air Resources Board signs off on the rules to implement it.

It will also be a big day for Aaron Singer, CEO of San Francisco startup Pacific Carbon Exchange, (at left) which is engaging in an enterprise thought dead in the water not so long ago: carbon trading.

“It’s the official starting gun for California and for Western regional carbon markets,” Singer said. “It means we get to make this business a growing reality.”

Central to the law, which goes into effect in 2012, is a “cap and trade” system designed to limit the amount of carbon from the state’s 500 largest emitters – mostly power plants, energy companies and heavy industry.

Companies emitting less than their state-mandated limit can trade their unused allowance – also known as carbon credits, or offsets – with companies that may be seeking to emit more than their mandated share.

“This is a significant milestone,” said Josh Margolis, CEO of Cantor CO2e, a San Francisco offshoot of New York’s Cantor Fitzgerald, referring to the board’s expected action. “In the trading world, it’s been a decadelong anticipation.”

With the Bay Area Council serving as the firm’s incubator, Singer has been working on its trading infrastructure for the past two years and is in the process of obtaining the certifications and accreditations from the U.S. Commodity and Futures Exchange Commission.

In the meantime, PCarbX, as it is known, plans to begin some futures and options trading next year, pending a full rollout when the bell officially rings in January 2012.

In September, it also signed a memorandum of understanding with the Shanghai Environment and Energy Exchange to explore the establishment of more carbon markets in the United States and China.

Other entrants: PCarbX is not alone. In addition to Cantor CO2e, others in the “environmental commodity” business who are reported to be coming to California include the global Intercontinental Exchange and the Green Exchange, both with U.S. headquarters in New York. “We expect healthy competition,” Singer said.

“As a San Francisco-based entity with ties to policymakers, they’re in a unique position,” said Adam Raphaely, director of environmental markets at Karbone, an environmental commodity brokerage and project finance company in New York. “We see a potential relationship there.”

Neither is California alone, even though Congress and the Obama administration gave up on a national cap-and-trade policy this year.

The Western Climate Initiative, a cap-and-trade program, which includes several Western states and Canadian provinces, is due to go into effect – also in 2012.

Still, for all the anticipation, carbon trading here is likely to start small, especially as the Air Resources Board is initially giving emission allowances away for free, rather than the $10 minimum per ton the agency had proposed in its rules. And companies don’t necessarily have to trade through exchanges.

“You won’t see a big bang, but, rather, a buildup in intensity,” said Margolis, who has estimated the market could be worth anywhere from $3 billion to $58 billion by 2020 – the target year for California’s emissions to be lowered.

“This is much more than simply a business opportunity,” Singer said. “We’re here to serve the aims of AB32 and help the next generation of clean tech investment for our state.”

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/15/BUO21GQG0D.DTL#ixzz18L4gAqtW

About these ads
This entry was posted in Carbon credits and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

127 Responses to Chicago Climate Exchange = FAIL, Now California opens “Pacific Carbon Exchange”

  1. Dave Turner says:

    Dont them Bastards (sorry) ever learn. I could have cried today listening to chris huhne.

  2. MB says:

    Top 500 companies… It’s gonna be a race to #501. Bye-bye jobs.

  3. Leave it to California……

  4. Richard Sharpe says:

    I wonder if Governor Moonbeam will figure out that his budget problem will only get worse if he allows CARB to continue on its silly path.

  5. Baa Humbug says:

    Some of the top 500 may shut down operations that emit, grab the cash from permits and re-open in neighbouring states who may also offer incentives for bringing jobs etc.

    This has been done already, just google redcar.

    A smart Governor in neighbouring states can take real advantage of this madness and thus ensure decades of re-election.

  6. Harry Bergeron says:

    I had to invent the term “Lametardic” to fully describe this travesty.

    REPLY: LOL, but apparently, great minds think alike, four times previously – Anthony

  7. Zorro says:

    “We expect healthy competition,” Singer said.
    OK, so how about .00000005 cents per ton.
    Total madness from a BK state.

  8. John Kehr says:

    I would short the market if I could….

    But they will probably force companies to pay up. There is no reason for a business to still be in California. Time to leave the sinking ship.

    John Kehr
    The Inconvenient Skeptic

  9. jim karlock says:

    I wonder how much money Al Gore has in this venture?

    Thanks
    JK

  10. Chuck says:

    Reminds me of Blazing Saddles where the Cowboys stink up the camp from baked beans.

    Everyone takes their turn.

    Greenfrye Tomatos

  11. I California wants to tax carbon and they apparently need the money, then I say let them. If they think trading pretend carbon credits for real money will some how do anything useful for anyone I think they have all been smoking way to much. The thing sounds like it has been written by Cheech and Chong. (I hope I spelled this correctly)

  12. Sonicfrog says:

    And, again I ask myself… Why, oh why, do I still live here??????

  13. CodeTech says:

    I was never a big fan of the movie Forrest Gump, but as I read this article the phrase “stupid is as stupid does” just kept echoing in my mind…

  14. Charles Higley says:

    Not only will the cost of energy go up, but I imagine they will aim to issue lower and lower permits every year, raising it even higher. To paraphrase our fearless leader, “Of course, I expect energy prices to skyrocket.”

  15. Ed Murphy says:

    That pic is not Aaron Singer, that would be Mr Ross. Go to the CCE site for his ugly mug.

  16. Ed Murphy says:

    I mean the PCE site.

  17. Douglas DC says:

    Of Oregon waits with bated breath-to cut down on our CO2…
    Oregon is Califonia’s mini-me..

  18. ew-3 says:

    The 2nd revolution is about to begin.

  19. Bill Jamison says:

    Or to put it another way…$3 billion to $58 billion by 2020 in additional cost passed on to California consumers.

    Just another nail in the coffin for many California businesses.

    :sigh:

  20. TomRude says:

    And in Canada British Columbia, the internal race for the leadership of the BC Liberals, one contender offered to scrap the carbon tax…

  21. TomRude says:

    If anything this shows that some politicians are hell bent to force feed us this green garbage regardless of the science. If tomorrow scientists all agreed that the IPCC was wrong, these guys would still do it. Recall anyone?

  22. Joshua J says:

    I wonder how long before California puts carbon on its Prop 65 list, which is monstrously useless (other than as a basis for regulatory extortion).

  23. Hoser says:

    Brown started the destruction of California with the Energy Commission. Now he can see his work finally pay off. The good news is the rest of the country can learn from the collapse of a once great state. I wonder how long it will take the smug residents on the coast to figure out what went wrong. Green sounded so good.

  24. UK Sceptic says:

    This is what happens when you give granola the vote…

  25. Baa Humbug says:

    Dennis Nikols, P. Geol. says:
    December 16, 2010 at 9:07 pm

    The thing sounds like it has been written by Cheech and Chong. (I hope I spelled this correctly)

    Yeah you did, and here is a youtube clip demonstrating the SIZE of the californian stupidity.

  26. Richard deSousa says:

    @ Sonicfrog…. me too!

  27. Gibo says:

    Arizona, Nevada and Oregon should see this as a great opportunity to attract any remaining Californian industry from across the border.

  28. Geoff Sherrington says:

    “In the trading world, it’s been a decadelong anticipation.”

    Translate: Those hungry vultures had to circle for 10 years before someone appeared with some money to fight over.

    The question is, as always, whether this is the best allocation of scarce funds and in the national interest. It’s not. It’s a new version of an old way for the smarties to get rich quick at the expense of Joe Citizen who just keeps pluggin’ along delivering the goods and services of commerce.

    Have these people no shame?

  29. G.L. Alston says:

    Timing with AGU event underscores the notion that coincidences don’t exist. Seriously, what are the chances?

  30. ZT says:

    You’d think that an LA smog trading scheme would make more sense. Where are Ken Lay and Paul Krugman, when they’re needed?

  31. ant says:

    I have a wonderful opera house for sale in Sydney Australia with water views and a terrific central location.

  32. LevelGaze says:

    @ant
    Hang on, I have sole agent rights to that one!

  33. Steeptown says:

    $58 billion by 2020 for trading an invisible and freely available plant food. We live in a strange world where the lunatics are in charge of the asylum.

  34. John F. Hultquist says:

    Being honest, I don’t think anyone knows what will happen with PCarbX, industry in the State, or the well being of the State’s budget, and so on.

    However, there will be no effect on climate.

    And, even funnier, is that there is no way to know.

  35. AusieDan says:

    The formation of this new exchange is a really great idea.
    It will take economic activity from one state and transfer it to other states or even to other nations.

    It is essentially a perfect example of either:
    (1) The circular flow of money in the economy, OR
    (2) circulare thinking

    Your choice.

  36. Ben D says:

    Perhaps its like other forms of ponzi schemes that keep on popping up, it’s a given that the creators generally make a ‘killing’ off their initial investment whereas the late comers lose everything,… Chicago Climate Exchange = FAIL, Now California opens “Pacific Carbon Exchange”

  37. Squidly says:

    I have decided to open an Nitrogen trading company in my garage. I figure it makes just as much sense, and hey, if these guys can trade air, why can’t I?

  38. old construction worker says:

    “Central to the law, which goes into effect in 2012, is a “cap and trade” system designed to limit the amount of carbon from the state’s 500 largest emitters – mostly power plants, energy companies and heavy industry.”

    In a few years 500 largest emitters will not produce enough revenue, then the next 500 emitters will have to be “taxed”. Then another 5000 emitters and so on. As the wealth is drained out of California, there will be a Carbon tax levied on California consumers for buying goods and services from out of State. The richest class won’t care because they will be on receiving side of carbon trading money. The “poor” won’t care because they will demand more tax money. The tax paying middle class will move out unless they work for the government.

    This is California’s Road to prosperity.

  39. David L says:

    “As a San Francisco-based entity with ties to policymakers, they’re in a unique position”

    A unique position? Usually when politicians are “in bed” with business it’s considered a bad thing. So a phony baloney company will be created and supported by phony baloney policy enacted by phoney baloney politicians. I dont even want to visit CA anymore. Is that place even still a part of the US?

  40. Grumpy old Man says:

    Pissing other peoples’ money up against the wall- it’s what socialists (liberals) do best.

  41. Darell C. Phillips says:

    Perhaps we’ll finally see a proper border patrol there but the irony of it will be to keep Californians from escaping to other states. I also wonder how much Han Solo would be worth on the new PCarbX after he was carbon frozen? Skywalker ranch is after all in California. Hmm, this begs the question was Han a Climate Skeptic and thus why he was “sequestered” possibly? Anyway, I’ve got the perfect desk for Mr. Singer.

    http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/han-solo-frozen-in-carbonite-desk/

  42. old44 says:

    There is a simple way of defeating this carbon trading tax, if the power companies shut down as soon as they reach the state-mandated limit I would bet the Government would fold in two minutes. Movie stars mansions without air-conditioning, unthinkable.

  43. Nigel Brereton says:

    Both California and the UK are imposing a minimum carbon price so that when the markets stagnate it still looks as though there are trades to the outside world. It’s time for a new film “Wall Street 3″, remember the phrase in that husky predatorial voice “Green is Good”.

  44. Frosty says:

    Squidly says:
    December 16, 2010 at 11:14 pm

    I have decided to open an Nitrogen trading company in my garage.”

    You could be on to a good thing, Community co-op sustainable carbon club – All the jet setting the Greensters are doing, they would jump at the chance to offset their guilt. Get them to put their money where their mouths are.

  45. Shevva says:

    Over here in the UK we can’t be bothered with Cap and trade where just going to add it to everyone’s fuel bill, hum I wonder who suffers the most when the fuel bills go up, I’m guessing it’s not he climate scientists at UEA? the politician’s? or the most vulnerable in society?

    I understand in society over decades we have had disputes CFC’s, Swine/Bird flu and such but is this the first ‘chicken little scare’ where the solution will kill more than the problem? I can see people having to decide if they eat or heat there home’s (although i’m thinking the UK here as i’m guessing California doesn’t need to heat there homes that much). All down to good old CO2.

    Sod the human’s lets save a planet that doesn’t need saving.

  46. John Trigge says:

    In South Australia, while justifying a 12% increase in electricity prices. our Energy Minister was reported thus:

    ————————————————-
    Mr Conlon said power price rises were “inevitable” until the Federal Government set a carbon price. “This is a stiff increase in the price of electricity but unfortunately, it’s not unexpected,” he said. “Until such time as we land a carbon price, we’re going to continue to see significant increases in the price of electricity.”
    Mr Conlon said uncertainty over the future of a carbon tax meant providers were using expensive generators, driving up long-run costs.
    “What it means is that people will not put in the most effective or efficient form of generation, they’re putting in the cheap and expensive generation until they can get some certainty.
    ———————————————-

    So, it appears that our illustrious State leaders expect electricity prices to FALL when our Federal Government sets a carbon price, which one would expect to INCREASE power prices as it is an additional cost to the producers.

  47. John Trigge says:

    Will there be a levy or tax on goods coming into California from other states or countries?

  48. Robinson says:

    How can you call the Chicago exchange a fail? A few people made tens of millions of dollars from setting it up!

  49. LabMunkey says:

    @ dave turner- first comment,

    Tell me about it- Chris Huhne’s stupidity and ideological blinkedness angers me immensley. How can one man be so stupid.

    He has one, proven, efficient and reliable lowcarbon (bleurg) power source ready for use- nuclear.

    Yet he is pouring subsidies into wind, solar and carbon capture.

    The man ACTUALLY has a way to prevent the release of more carbon by building nuclear power stations- yet he’d preferr to catch the released carbon instead.

    Words literally fail me. It seriously makes me want to leave the uk sometimes the idiocy of your politicians.

  50. Adam Gallon says:

    Got to put this in, “Private Eye’s” cover!
    http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/covers/full/1122_big.jpg

  51. Al Gored says:

    LabMunkey says:
    December 17, 2010 at 12:45 am

    “Tell me about it- Chris Huhne’s stupidity and ideological blinkedness angers me immensley. How can one man be so stupid… The man ACTUALLY has a way to prevent the release of more carbon by building nuclear power stations- yet he’d preferr to catch the released carbon instead.”

    Seems that Huhne has had a sudden epiphany, and is now supporting nuclear power. Just put some links to that in the ‘Tips & Notes” if you missed that.

  52. Dennis says:

    I recently drove the length of California twice. Each breathtaking vista begged the question “How the magnificence and potential of this state could be eclipsed by the idiocy of its government? “

  53. Tim says:

    “Companies emitting less than their state-mandated limit can trade their unused allowance – also known as carbon credits, or offsets – with companies that may be seeking to emit more than their mandated share.”

    Or buy those companies out and keep them as carbon receptacles?

  54. Patrick Davis says:

    “LabMunkey says:
    December 17, 2010 at 12:45 am”

    Where would you go? All of the EU is heading down the same path, so too Australia and New Zealand.

    “Adam Gallon says:
    December 17, 2010 at 12:48 am”

    Ah that image really cheered me up today!

  55. Jeroen B. says:

    I was going to try and make a limerick out of it but I’m both facepalming and headdesking at the sheer stupidity of it its interfering with my thought processes.

    Do’h.

  56. Alexander K says:

    As a guest in the UK, I used to feel a little embarrassed being rude about my host country’s politicians but the truly bonkers Climate and Education ministers can write the most ridiculous things into policy and most of the population don’t even notice. The former believes that windmills work in a largely wind-free environment (it does blow up north, but the windmills freeze solid there just when electricity is needed to heat houses!) and the latter knows so little about math, stats, and education that he promotes the scary idea that most kids would perform ‘ above average’ if their teachers were all university grads.
    I know the steady drip of Marxism in Western education over the years has worn away much of the independendent and logical thought that once typified educated people, but the reasoning currently emanating from political parties throughout the Western world seems to owe more to the collected works of the Marx Brothers than it does to Carl Marx.

  57. meemoe_uk says:

    I’d buy a ton of carbon for 5 cents. Carbon is very useful you know.

  58. Ralph says:

    I have got 15 million Carbon Credits – prove that I haven’t.

    Isn’t that the problem with Carbon Trading?

  59. Layne Blanchard says:

    No laughing matter. This is merely profiteering on the business shakedown the state will engage in. The price will be meaningful long enough to drain vast amounts of wealth from CA’s business. The state will of course, approach the Fed for a bailout….which it can never repay……and that could extend it further. The parasites will milk it until the turnip can give no more blood.

    CA is roughly 10% of the US economy if I recall, so we can likely count on it to drag the country down as well.

    Time for a Federal BAN of all climate related legislation in ANY level of government.

  60. 1DandyTroll says:

    ‘“This is much more than simply a business opportunity,” Singer said. “We’re here to serve the aims of AB32 and help the next generation of clean tech investment for our state.”’

    I can see it now, light from the coming hippies commercials for promoting this new scheme.

    Do you want to kill your grand children?

    So why invest in dirty coal power plant producing future death that is going C11 as you read this?

    That is why we exist to help you save future generations? So be kinder, gentler, greener and save the Planet today. Invest now–for cleaner smoke to huff and puff. Invest in Bongtechnology (incorporated since 2010.)

  61. David says:

    Born and raised in Calif. For a beautifully and tragically told anecdotal story of how disparate liberal policies combine to create third world conditions in one of the most beautiful, ideal and wealthy land masses on earth read this short essay. You will not regret the understanding you will receive.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/255038/enemy-within-ian-murray

  62. wayne Job says:

    If I owned a power station with these new rules, my options would be pay the price or stay within the carbon limits. The easiest option is to cut back production to stay within the limits. Thus I make a profit with less staff and a higher KW hr price. The only looser is the state who have to buy more power from nasty states like ‘Texas’. Now if I were also the owner of a Texan power plant and California asked for extra power to cover a short fall. I would most likely ask that a premium be paid, a ship load of premium.

    I find it hard to believe that so many can be so stupid for such a long period of time.
    This situation could only be possible if the brainwashing in the school system is working as planned. No other explanation could account for a herd mentality on such a scale. Walk the beaches of california and see the black lumps of oil and tar that wash ashore, a natural out pouring of natures gift to mankind. Tar volcanoes are a natural wonder of Californian waters. Sadness is all I can feel.

  63. Peter says:

    RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) : FAIL in the Northeast

    http://www.rggi.org/market/co2_auctions/results

    In ten manadtory auctions for CO2 allowances in just two years, the bid to offer ratio went from 4.1 to 0.57, the price dropped from maximum $3.51per ton to $1.87 per ton – only because there is a set reserve price of…$1.87. And they dare to call it a market???

    Proceeds redistributed to foolish ineficient programs… In total $777M squeezed from power generators – guess where they got the money? Northeast has one of the highest electricity rates in the nation.

    And the purpose of this folly?

    ‘The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is a cooperative effort by participating states to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas that causes global warming.’

    Well, they must be doing something right after all, cooling the planet:
    http://www.weather.com/outlook/weather-news/news/articles/northeast-storm-potential_2010-12-15

  64. Golf Charley says:

    Who pays for the CO2 produced when people get their fingers burned by dodgy investment scams?

  65. General Misinformation says:

    This is probably a stupid question but I can’t find anything on point. Is carbon the problem or is it just that we may be warming the atmosphere? Air conditioning systems are not 100% efficient so even though they cool air inside buildings, their net effect is warming the air. With heating systems, we are warming the air inside buildings, those buildings leak and that heat gets into the atmosphere. In addition, the equipment to heat this air generates additional heat. As the population grows and more of it lives in conditioned spaces, the net impact of all this goes up. Could this be a cause and how much of one for global warming?

  66. oMan says:

    Not the first time California has shot itself in the foot over energy policy. A few years back they deregulated the wholesale market for electricity but capped the retail price. Result? Consumption kept climbing but suppliers got killed. Suppliers ran away. Brownouts and panic. Shortfall made up at great expense by spot purchasing power from out of state. Cries of “gouging” and Bill Lockyer, State A-G, headed a lynch mob looking for villains. Not sure how that all shook out; Enron was involved and, for all I know, may have organized the whole thing to create opportunities for trading profits. But I think it shows what happens when idiots interfere in markets. Or, as here, force one into existence.

  67. Tom in Florida says:

    old44 says:{December 16, 2010 at 11:45 pm}
    “There is a simple way of defeating this carbon trading tax, if the power companies shut down as soon as they reach the state-mandated limit I would bet the Government would fold in two minutes. Movie stars mansions without air-conditioning, unthinkable.”

    That is an excellent idea!

  68. David Wright says:

    old44 says:
    December 16, 2010 at 11:45 pm

    Pure genius!

    Wish that politics and industry had a few more original thinkers like you!

  69. Jason Calley says:

    Ralph says: “I have got 15 million Carbon Credits – prove that I haven’t. Isn’t that the problem with Carbon Trading?”

    No, not at all! In fact, that is a feature, not a bug.

    Seriously, we should all (and I include myself) stop acting as if we are having a discussion about well meaning but deluded people. This carbon trading scheme is a scam. Period, end of description. It is designed to be a form of fraud. It does nothing to help the environment and was never meant to. It is meant to allow a small group of people to make huge sums of cold cash from masses of people who think they are being helped in the process.

    Pretending that these politicians are public servants is wrong. The flaws in the scheme are there on purpose. Those involved are nothing more than partners in crime. They are people who would fleece us like sheep.

  70. Tom Birkert says:

    Does this mean I can sell the future price? If so, then that’s as sure a way of making money as I’ve ever seen in my life…

  71. PandR says:

    I think most of you are wrong about this failing. Look at how certain people made millions from the Chicago exchange. Then there are the state subsidies. Then there is the reputation of all the power brokers and film stars. The state may die, but there is too much money at stake to let this thing fail.

  72. RockyRoad says:

    Here’s another in-depth view of California’s “enlightenment”:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/255320/two-californias-victor-davis-hanson

  73. tarpon says:

    Stupid is a really hard thing to fix.

    We could spend the money on nuclear power development, and get rid of all the CO2, but apparently California is too dumb to figure that out.

    I wonder why they call him moonbeam?

  74. Pascvaks says:

    This is outlandish!!!! Cap and Trade is NOTHING but a Ponzi, or better still, Madof Scheme to rip off innocent people. If California, or any other state, wants to reduce its carbon footprint all we have to do is set an annual limit and shut down everything when we get to that level for the rest of the year. And I mean everything! Cars, Trucks, Trains, Aeroplanes, Tractors, Harvestors, Combines, Water Pumps, Sewer Treatment Plants, Factories, Coffee Shops, Beaches, Schools, Colleges, Universities, DMV Offices, Hospitals, Publishers, Post Offices, Border Control Checkpoints, Disneyland, Hollywood, The Central Valley, Dams, Reservors, Trams, Freeways, ChiPs, Heaters, AirConditioners, EVERYTHING! We need to get serious about this California! Now, let’s pull up our socks, teighten our belts, put away the surfboards, lock the car in the garage, and show the world how to do it right! No more tricks! No more Cap and Trade crap! Let’s just do it!

  75. kramer says:

    There are already about 23 other states that have a cap-and-trade program. I suspect CA will ‘integrate’ with these other states over time. I also suspect the rest of the states will eventually get into a cap-and-trade systems and viola, there is the national cap-and-trade program that the leftists have wanted.

    It’s an estimated $20 trillion dollar/year market and major banks already have carbon derivatives almost ready to go. They stand to make huge profits off of the trading of life. I don’t see us winning this one.

  76. polistra says:

    “There is a simple way of defeating this carbon trading tax, if the power companies shut down….”

    That isn’t going to happen. You can be sure the power companies will benefit from the scheme, and you can also be sure that the rules were written with their assistance. Remember, this whole business began with Enron.

  77. Jeremy says:

    I give these people full props for being so committed to their cause.

    Now if they could only see how much they are basing “beliefs” on “faith” maybe the world might change for the better.

  78. Henry chance says:

    Enron started this mess. It seems they still cling to best business practices from the Enron model.

    Creators of carbon credit scheme cashing in on it, Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Mikhail Gorbachev years after Enron.

  79. Brian H says:

    “Starting gun” indeed! Thumb firmly on trigger, barrel gripped by teeth and tongue, “Ready, aim, …”

    Even loaded with a blank cartridge, guaranteed fatal. Violent ejection of medulla and bone fragments from the base of the skull has very consistent results.

  80. Lance says:

    Not sure of the exact phrase, but isn’t it like ‘he who fails to learn from the past is bound to repeat it’ read Chicago Exchange…

  81. R Taylor says:

    Unfortunately, it might be wishful thinking that neighboring jurisdictions will take up the economic slack caused by the folly of Californians.

  82. emmaliza says:

    Californians will probably meet their carbon targets before 2020. They will teach us all how to live without electricity. Enviros have filed lawsuits preventing solar plants in the desert, nuclear power plants, ugly windmills that kill birdies, drilling their vast reserves of petroleum, and power lines across natural areas. Cal media railed against Texas companies for coming to their aid during their brown-outs, discouraging future aid……It will be interesting to see the upcoming results as the remaining power plants die from old age.

  83. Scott B says:

    I think the link at the top has a far more interesting story than California getting in on carbon trading.

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19878-carbon-trading-tempts-firms-to-make-greenhouse-gas.html

    “Fearful of a burgeoning scam, CDM officials recently began a review. The European Union wants all credits for HFC-22 outlawed. But last week CDM officials in China threatened that factories there would respond by releasing the gas into the atmosphere. This week’s issue of new credits to Juhua suggests that the CDM has backed off before its review is completed.”

    “HFC-22 is 14,800 more protent than carbon dioxide.”

    This is flat out extorsion. Interestingly, the Chinese firms doing the extorting are either willing to kill us all if they don’t get their money (if they believe that HFC-22 can cause CGW), or they’re willing to expose the CGW scam if they don’t get their money (if they don’t think HFC-22 will cause CGW). Since they got paid off, we can only speculate…

  84. Enneagram says:

    Will it be part of the show business, like Hollywood Science?

  85. R T Barker says:

    Crime endorsed by the electorate.

  86. SJWhiteley says:

    I wonder if they will get a lump of coal in their stocking this year…

  87. Steve Oregon says:

    If there’s a whole lotta buying of nothing to produce nothing causing energy prices to needlessly rise won’t this be a boom to lawyers and the court system.
    Maybe that’s the real plan?
    The new economy? Litigate to prosperity?

  88. 1DandyTroll says:

    Kind of ironic but I always thought the great rift that would separate Cali from the main land was geological in nature, not atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide ponzi-scheming.

    Or wait, maybe it is the sound of 500 companies uprooting and leaving town?

  89. Mike McMillan says:

    Interesting, n’est-ce pas? Government invents an imaginary currency, allocates it among its corporate cronies, then requires everyone to obtain it from those who have it. Sounds like something from Ayn Rand.

    Time to buy stock in Bekins and United Van Lines.

  90. Ian L. McQueen says:

    Squidly says:
    December 16, 2010 at 11:14 pm
    I have decided to open an Nitrogen trading company in my garage. I figure it makes just as much sense, and hey, if these guys can trade air, why can’t I?

    Squidly-

    You are too late. Companies are promoting nitrogen for filling vehicle tires.

    IanM

  91. Corky Boyd says:

    Question:

    Will the state of California be included in the top 500 emitters? Surerly, with all its buildings to heat and vehicles (police cars, cars given to state legislators etc) they qualify. Ditto for municipal transit systems. Will they pay for carbon credits, or exempt themselves?

    Good question.

  92. crosspatch says:

    This is absolutely asinine. We have bureaucrats with their fingers in their ears going “la la la” refusing to hear what has happened in Denmark and Chicago. This will not end well. I am leaving, I have had it … now to find someplace else to live. I like North Carolina … but I like the West.

  93. Laurie Bowen says:

    With, our penchant for Unintended Consequences, this is going to be made into a dry ice trading platform. As for a carbon trading platform . . hello coal.

    Purchase Dry Ice
    Pellets, Blocks, Blasting Supplies 34 Locations – 34 Years in Business
    http://www.continentalcarbonic.com

  94. anopheles says:

    States in the US can’t print their own money. Putting them or their agents in charge of issuing CO2 credits is to give them the ability to magic money from the air. It is inflationary, in a way which will be beyond the control of the Fed. Of course it only needs everybody to act with the appropriate amount of self-restaint. Good luck with that.

  95. Ian L. McQueen says:

    The belief that CO2 is responsible for future catastrophic warming just goes on and on despite the fact that there is zero scientific proof that CO2 will have more than a minuscule effect on temperature. The latest contribution to the Chicken Little scare comes from the (Canadian) National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy [http://www.climateprosperity.ca/eng/climate-prosperity-eng.php] in the form of their latest report: http://www.climateprosperity.ca/eng/studies/climate-impacts/report/degrees-of-change-report-eng.pdf
    I am just starting to read it, but I fully expect to find that it is based on a complete belief in the IPCC reports.

    IanM

  96. Bill in Vigo says:

    I may be wrong but it seems that I remember a law suit some years ago when a state (I think California) tried to tax both companies and individuals that had left the state on their income because if they hadn’t moved the state would have had the tax revenue. This seems to be about the same mentality. The sad thing is that it took several appeals to get it out of the court system. It seems that some of the judiciary are on the wagon for the redistribution of wealth in any way possible. It will be hard for those retired that have worked all their lives and now the government and the scammers are going to devalue any thing of value to the point of near starvation for those that are on fixed income. This carbon scheme is just the start. God help us as we seem unable to help ourselves.

    Bill Derryberry

  97. DD More says:

    “Still, for all the anticipation, carbon trading here is likely to start small, especially as the Air Resources Board is initially giving emission allowances away for free, rather than the $10 minimum per ton the agency had proposed in its rules. And companies don’t necessarily have to trade through exchanges.”

    The market set the price of this commodity at under $0.05. It is impossible fool the market for that long.

    “This is much more than simply a business opportunity,” Singer said. “We’re here to serve the aims of AB32 and help the next generation of clean tech investment for our state.”

    From the SFGate page, a story of how ‘Silicon Valley’ no longer has chip companies and they have all left due to too high costs.
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/16/BUEO1GQRDV.DTL&feed=rss.news

  98. D Caldwell says:

    This is an unfortunate opportunity for the rest of the country to watch in horror while California undergoes self-mutilation by intentionally making energy more expensive and in turn damaging their State’s economy and killing desperately needed jobs. The promise of replacing lost jobs with new green jobs is mostly wishful thinking and a cruel joke on the State’s working class. Let’s hope they come to their senses before they completely self-destruct.
    Because the lesson from Spain’s experience was apparently missed, let’s also hope that the rest of the country is capable of learning from the California experiment that is about to begin.

  99. Roger Knights says:

    “Cap & Trade: A Train Wreck”
    (Analysis of a CBO report on how it would be structured)

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/captrade-train-wreck

  100. harrywr2 says:

    emmaliza says:
    December 17, 2010 at 6:36 am

    “Californians will probably meet their carbon targets before 2020. They will teach us all how to live without electricity”

    It won’t be that bad. You will just have to learn to make do with electricity produced when the wind blows and pay for the transmission losses from Washington and Oregon.
    You’ll probably have to give up that TV with the DVR recorder in favor of a battery powered laptop and a internet subscription to netflix as the wind is never going to blow when your favorite TV show is being broadcast.

    The smart grid will still allow your air conditioner to run 3 months a year, December,January and February just like the folks in Australia.

  101. Enneagram says:

    Is this a better business than sewing machines? :-)

  102. peterhodges says:

    there is no stopping determined thieves

    look how many tries it took them to get a central bank up and running

  103. CRS, Dr.P.H. says:

    EPA’s strategy is to go after major GHG emitters, armed with their Supreme Court ruling (Massechusetts et. al. v EPA, 2007) and subsequent endangerment finding.

    http://www.pewclimate.org/epavsma.cfm

    Not to be a downer, but the US EPA is totally invested into GHG mitigation. I’ve been in many discussions with the right folks and see how this is going, up front & personal.

    No trade, just cap via regulation, similar to how water pollution is regulated from sewage treatment plants under the NPDES permit system of the Clean Water Act. It’s an old model at the EPA – regulate first & let the industry figure it out with their own resources. Worked for CWA, RCRA etc. so they are giving it a shot with GHG.

    GOP makes noise about using the Congressional Review Act to counter this, but all the cards are falling the EPA’s direction…further pressure is coming from the threat of public nuisance lawsuits:

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/12/07/supreme-court-to-decide-is-global-warming-a-public-nuisance/

  104. Ken Harvey says:

    Sounds great to me. My kids and grandkids will rejoice in any uplift in the Arizona real estate market.

  105. AndiC says:

    Don’t forget that Consultants are the Rats that swim towards a sinking ship

  106. ann r says:

    So we Californians will all live like the Amish: oil lamps, kerosene heat and light, Percherons doing the plowing, etc. Can’t you just see I-5 and 808 with rush hour horse drawn wagons? Wonder if the Caltrans horse poop clean-up buggies will be horse drawn as well.

  107. Mark T says:

    States in the US can’t print their own money.

    Yes and no. States, as well as other more local municipalities, regularly issue municipal bonds, which is essentially what the Federal Reserve does when it “prints money.”

    Mark

  108. JPeden says:

    D Caldwell says:
    December 17, 2010 at 9:59 am

    Let’s hope they [Californians] come to their senses before they completely self-destruct.

    Nah, imo, since they haven’t, they won’t – apparently it’s just too much fun. For the Narcissistically infantile adults among us, destroying things is fun, and even thrilling. It’s a bona fide “high”. And if you’ve also conveniently set yourself up as a “Progressive” hater of “Capitalism” and “America”, destroying whatever it has produced then becomes a Marxist moral obligation. So unless there are Teapartiers in California who will stay and fight, Californians won’t wake up until it’s too late, or until the rest of us are too looted, if we allow it.

  109. Pops says:

    California has been terminated.

  110. M2Cents says:

    “Central to the law, which goes into effect in 2012, is a “cap and trade” system designed to limit the amount of carbon from the state’s 500 largest emitters – mostly power plants, energy companies and heavy industry.”

    So California plans to import all their electricity and gasoline from other states and countries where it will not be subject to the cap-and-trade policy, and has to produce more CO2 after factoring in losses and transport. Typical political-environmental idiocy.

  111. richardM says:

    Well, the Birkenstock/sock combo wearing, Mac using, Starbucks drinking, recyclable scrubbing and sorting types have to have yet another thing to feel good about right?

    What I find face palm amazing is that this has already proven to be a non-starter in more than one market – does the great Socialist State of California have knowledge that no one else has?

  112. Roger Knights says:

    kramer says:
    December 17, 2010 at 5:58 am

    There are already about 23 other states that have a cap-and-trade program. I suspect CA will ‘integrate’ with these other states over time. I also suspect the rest of the states will eventually get into a cap-and-trade systems and viola, there is the national cap-and-trade program that the leftists have wanted.

    It’s an estimated $20 trillion dollar/year market and major banks already have carbon derivatives almost ready to go. They stand to make huge profits off of the trading of life. I don’t see us winning this one.

    When the roof falls in on the world’s financial system, these dreamy schemes will be suspended pronto, “for the duration.”

  113. Garry says:

    anopheles says at 9:13 am:
    “States in the US can’t print their own money. Putting them or their agents in charge of issuing CO2 credits is to give them the ability to magic money from the air. It is inflationary, in a way which will be beyond the control of the Fed.”

    anopheles, you have hit the nail on the head.

    What you say above is the entire impetus for the relentless push to cap and trade. “Magic money.”

    I call it “monetizing the air.”

    And Al Gore and his 18 partners ex-Goldman (see Generation Investments LLP) are exactly the kinds of sleazy sleazeballs who will benefit from this scheme, which is entirely and 100 percent at the expense of everyone else, e.g., the everyday taxpayer.

    Carbon credits are literally fungible, tradeable, valuable monetary instruments aka “money.”

    That’s why pols and financial parasites are so excited (and relentless) about cap and trade. They get to create and then grab free money under the risible guise of “climate change.” Criminals too, as we have seen repeatedly in the EU and very recently in China.

    What a scam!

  114. George E. Smith says:

    So izzat picture a picture of article author Andrew S. Ross; or izzat the carbon scam artist ”

    I followed the links; nowhere to post a comment. I don’t waste any time on sites that don’t have an open comment line; screw them.

  115. S Basinger says:

    Not sure if anyone knows the details of this here, but can anyone clarify the following statement for me:

    “Companies emitting less than their state-mandated limit can trade their unused allowance – also known as carbon credits, or offsets – with companies that may be seeking to emit more than their mandated share.”

    Say Company X has 100 carbon units ‘share’, and Company Y has 100 carbon units ‘share’. Company X shuts down production, and thus uses 0 units – can they can sell this to Company Y for a profit without producing anything, while Company Y which increases production has to pay Company X for their unused credits?

    Isn’t this a massive disincentive to expand production and an incentive to decrease production? It seems daft vs a state fixed tax per unit of CO2.

  116. George E. Smith says:

    It seems to me that this is simply an unConstitutional State Money Counterfeiting scheme. These “Carbon credits”, which could just as easily be called C-bills for California Bills; aka State printed money; are simply created out of thin air in any amount the State wants to, and then sold as if they actually are something having a face value; as in CASH, and they can actually be sold or traded to others for something else of value; like protection money to prevent the Califonia CARB hoods from raiding your joint and shutting you down.

    Because that what they will do if you refuse to pay their mordida.

  117. Bernd Felsche says:

    I think that there’s a much better market for a speed exchange.

    It works on the same basis. People are allowed to drive as fast as the speed limit. So when they don’t want to go that fast, they can trade that difference, selling to those who want to go faster than the speed limit.

  118. Bob Diaz says:

    It’s really sad to see California deteriorate so badly over the years I have lived there. All I can say is that overall, the majority of people in California are really kept in the dark and have no clue of the Bozos we keep putting into office.

    AB32 is an example of “feel good laws”, the people who wrote it feel good about it, but in reality, energy costs will go up, businesses will leave, and unemployment will go up. This past November we did have a chance to delay the impact of AB32, BUT radical Environmental Groups spent millions of dollars in advertising telling the voters that AB32 will “AB32 will create almost 2 million jobs”.

    However, the “2 million jobs” are nothing more than fantasy jobs and the study that promotes that view makes MAJOR assumptions. What if the assumptions made are wrong?

    Will we be able to sue the Sierra Club and WWF for false advertising, if the jobs don’t happen?

  119. Cynthia Lauren Thorpe says:

    Lametardic………….! Perfect!

    Good One, Anthony! Along with Ipecac… a concise, brilliant new dictionary is truly coming into being…!
    Your Friend,
    Thorpie

  120. Davesix says:

    If I were to buy a ton of carbon on the exchange for a nickel, do you suppose they’d send me a fancy certificate that I could frame and post in my powder room as a monument to climate irrationality?

    I suppose that I’d receive an invoice of some sort, and that I’d be free to manipulate it in whatever fashion I wished, to memorialize the insanity…

  121. Gerry says:

    It seems that as the Carbon Exchanges start up, burst with activity then have their founders cut and run while they collapse and leave the later investors holding the bag, they are following the tried and true methods of: The Pyramid Scheme

    Next they’ll be trying the old Multi-Level Marketing schemes and holding home parties…

  122. D Caldwell says:

    This will be a good test of the “bigger fool” theory as we watch to see who actually pays real money for these carbon credits.

  123. E.M.Smith says:

    Mark T says:
    “States in the US can’t print their own money.”

    Yes and no. States, as well as other more local municipalities, regularly issue municipal bonds, which is essentially what the Federal Reserve does when it “prints money.”

    Um, not quite… close though.

    The Fed can simply wish up money without ANY bond being issued. The states can not. (The Fed can do this by many means, everything from changing reserve requirements to simply buying “assets” with it’s own “money” made by changing the bits in it’s computers).

    Traditionally, the Treasury actually prints and coins currency (as opposed to “money” which has a ‘store of value’ function that currency does not have… paper currencies inflate away to nothing, gold and silver do not) and these currency items are shipped to The Fed for distribution (via the Federal Banking System) in exchange from some computer bits being set in it’s acconts which it can then spend via checks… (Though the Treasury could just print and spend directly, but that would be cumbersome). The Treasury can also print up and issue bonds (often bought by The Fed; who can use real money to do it or just wish up some bits in it’s computers and use them; though also sold directly to folks from the Treasury).

    So, for The Federal Government to spend money it doesn’t have is pretty easy. It can literally print paper and coin coinage and spend that. It can issue bonds, that may be bought by regular folks, companies, other countries, whatever; but if nobody wants to buy them, it can ask The Fed to put some “money bits” in The Federal Government Accounts and put the US Bonds in The Fed vault.

    OK, a State can’t do that. Sure, it can print up bonds. But then it must find someone willing to BUY them and that may not happen. (Or may happen only at very high interest rates, as recently happened in California when we had a partial bond auction failure…)

    The State can NOT coin or print currency.
    The State does NOT have a Central State Bank that can just put some bits in it’s accounts and put the bonds in a vault.

    So when The US Government is spending $Trillions it can just do it. ( It only needs to borrow it from the Chinese if it doesn’t want an inflation problem).

    When The State is spending $Billions it doesn’t have, it must find someone to voluntarily hand over those dollars.

    Big Difference.

    When “bankruptcy” is in the air, the bond RATE skyrockets and folks start dumping them. Then the nice Chinese become very reluctant to hand money to The State, even for nice pretty paper with word “Bond” on it. As happened in that recent bond sale when they went for much higher rates than expected (i.e. lower prices and less money to The State) AND they didn’t sell all they had planned.

    The worse the hole, the worse this gets, until nobody will buy the bonds at any price.

    Then the State hits the wall.

    At that same point, the Banana Republic US Federal Government just litterally prints more pesos U$Dollars or asks their friends at The Fed to put more bits in their account and sends over a load of “US Treasury” IOUs. You know, The Fed executives that have to pass a congressional review to keep their job…

    (For the terminally curious, about then the National Currency hits the crapper and hyper inflation rumors begin. Everyone globally dumps the currency and it either collapses or they have the IMF loan them money and get a pile of “austerity” programs mandated in exchange for the loan. This may happen a couple of times before they eventually cancel the old currency and issue a new one. BTW, the US has done this before… Not just The Confederate currency (of which I have a sample) but also earlier US currencies. )

    So, bottom line: Folks who trade bonds stop buying (and are called “The Bond Vigilanties” as they refuse to throw good money after bad) and The State has to live within it’s means. The US Government does not. It can just inflate the currency away to nothing. The game is the same, right up until the last move. Then the State is screwed, while the US Goverment screws all holders of dollar denominated accounts.

  124. Layne Blanchard says:

    E.M said:
    “Everyone globally dumps the currency and it either collapses or they have the IMF loan them money and get a pile of “austerity” programs mandated in exchange for the loan. This may happen a couple of times before they eventually cancel the old currency and issue a new one. BTW, the US has done this before… Not just The Confederate currency (of which I have a sample) but also earlier US currencies. )……
    …………….The game is the same, right up until the last move. Then the State is screwed, while the US Goverment screws all holders of dollar denominated accounts.”

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and this is coming, isn’t it?

  125. Smokey says:

    Cheifio [BTW, is that as in "Chief Information Officer", or "Yes, sir, Chiefio"?]. That was a great explanation of the house of cards known as the federal reserve system.

    At the slightest hint of inflation, interest rates [especially long-term rates] will be jacked up, negating, or at least offsetting, the inflationary move. Maybe. Hopefully. Because inflation is easier to deal with than deflation.

    But combating deflation is very hard. “Pushing on a string” is too easy of an explanation. The underlying cause is more basic: people want money more than things [like commodities, real estate, etc.]; unlike inflation, where people want things, rather than depreciating paper money.

    But we seem to be entering the worst of all possible worlds: extreme stagflation. Deflation is certainly more scary than inflation, which we can protect ourselves from by buying real assets. But deflation is an attitude. It was the cause of the extensive, long-term ’30’s Depression. Folks just didn’t want to part with their money, fiat or otherwise. [eg, in 1921 there was a very deep depression. But the federal government slashed the budget by over 60% -- and the crisis quickly passed, leading into the prosperous Roaring 20's].

    It worries me now that real assets are being sold cheaply for real dollars, fiat or otherwise. One of my best friends is a long time jeweler. Today he told me he had bought a 3 ct. diamond, listed on the Rapp sheet [the dealers' wholesale cost] for $34,000 — for only $23,000. He said in the 45 years he had been in the jewelry business, he has never seen the Rapp sheet discounted.

    This scares the crap out of me. It means that people will now sell formerly valuable assets for far less than their value of only one year ago [thanx, Obama, for increasing our debt by $5 trillion, and giving most of the confiscated/invented loot to your cronies like ACORN, the Government Motors unions, "carbon" scientists, etc. None of it is going into fictitious 'shovel ready' pot holes where it is needed].

    The scary ‘tipping point’ isn’t the demonized but completely harmless CO2 molecule. The real “tipping point” is the point at which the government [OK, the federal reserve] loses control. This can happen very fast. Zimbabwe has issued a $100 Trillion note — since withdrawn due to non-stop inflation [and the $100 Trillion note was issued after twelve (12) zeroes had been deleted from the note it replaced].

    Every bit of this looming disaster comes from the Cloward-Piven strategy [just do a search] that has infested all levels of Western governments. Something for nothing has never worked for very long. The climate scam is just a part of a devious and scary march toward a totalitarian world government. Keep that in mind when you vote.

  126. Cynthia Lauren Thorpe says:

    Smokey. Thanks Again!

    That’s TWO for today. You’re always there when succinct information is needed.
    Like, in this case, reminding me of strategies, and enhancing my view on other topics…
    like……………the 3.8 carat diamond ring for sale at an auction in the U.K. tomorrow.
    (wouldn’t have remembered it without your comment!)

    It’s opening price is 200 British Pounds and its actual value appraised at 8,000-10,000. So, I agree – it’s disconcerting to watch real assets being purchased
    with real (and digitized) dollars…but, sometimes, heck. I’ll at least be able to bid, now.

    Thanks.

    C.L. Thorpe

Comments are closed.