«
»

Debating Carbon Cap-and-Trade

• October 28, 2009 10:58 pm

I’ll be in Chicago tomorrow to debate the merits of a cap-and-trade carbon emissions control regime at the Northwestern University School of Law.  It’s a noontime event sponsored by the student Federalist Society chapter.  For a preview see some of my prior VC posts (1, 2) and articles from NRO (1, 2).  I may also discuss some of my recent work on prizes.  (I should have a paper on the subject up on SSRN later this year.)

Categories: Climate Change    

    8 Comments

    1. Mike says:

      Goldman Sachs lobbied heavily for cap-and-trade. What could go wrong?

      October 28, 2009, 11:44 pm

    2. Bruce Hayden says:

      Mike: Goldman Sachs lobbied heavily for cap-and-trade. What could go wrong?

      I think that the better question is: What could go right?

      October 29, 2009, 12:19 am

    3. William Combs says:

      Good luck tomorrow!! I’m the VP of the Federalist Society at the University of Oklahoma Law chapter and we’ve already had a debate on the closing of Guantanamo Bay. It went great. These events are essential in today’s legal education arena. Too many legal academics are preaching anti-Constitutional principles. Go get ‘em!!

      October 29, 2009, 12:31 am

    4. John Moore says:

      Be careful about opposing Cap and Trade.

      You’ll be in Chicago, you know.

      October 29, 2009, 12:59 am

    5. geokstr says:

      John Moore: Be careful about opposing Cap and Trade.You’ll be in Chicago, you know.

      Pardon me if I have gotten this wrong, but IIRC, Mr. Adler is one of those odd ducks, someone on the right who believes in the myth of the Holy AGW, and is therefore in no danger in this instance in Chicago.

      October 29, 2009, 8:07 am

    6. Mark Buehner says:

      Global warming conference today, eh? I’ll make sure i have my winter coat, bound to be unseasonably cold.

      October 29, 2009, 9:47 am

    7. ArthurKirkland says:

      Good luck tomorrow!! I’m the VP of the Federalist Society at the University of Oklahoma Law chapter and we’ve already had a debate on the closing of Guantanamo Bay. It went great. These events are essential in today’s legal education arena. Too many legal academics are preaching anti-Constitutional principles.

      I agree that ‘legal academics preaching anti-Constitutional principles’ (regarding detention at Guantanamo, for example) is bad. What was your opinion, William, of an executive branch that not only preached but indeed implemented anti-Constitutional principles (regarding detention at Guantanamo, for example) for seven years?

      October 29, 2009, 10:19 am

    8. Kazinski says:

      Here is a presentation Richard Lindzen gave on Monday. The graph on page 13 is just stunning showing the variation of annual mean temperatures over the past century, compared to temperature variation in a typical month.

      There is also a great quote detailing the just how badly global warming is affecting the Arctic:

      “The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.”
      —US WEATHER BUREAU, 1922

      October 29, 2009, 4:17 pm