Planet Panel
washingtonpost.com/planetpanel
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Excerpts from comments by The Post's panel of experts on climate change.
Q What do Republicans have to gain, or lose, from blocking climate change legislation?
William O'Keefe, chief executive of the George C. Marshall Institute, and a former chief operating officer the American Petroleum Institute.
The answer depends not on whether the Republicans block the cap-and-trade legislation -- which they should -- but how they do it.
If they block the current version of the bill using arguments that foster a dialogue with the public, they will have taken an important step in reestablishing the Republican Party as the party of ideas that acts in the public's best interest. If they do so in a way that reinforces the image of a "just say no" party, they will have lost a great opportunity.
Republicans should accept that there is a legitimate risk, albeit a small one, and that growth in greenhouse gas emissions from developing countries could have an adverse environmental impact even as those countries slow the growth of their emissions. They should make clear that the risk does not justify the kind of rash actions proposed in either the Senate or House bills.
Bernard Finel is a senior fellow at the American Security Project.
Opponents of climate change legislation may gain politically in the short run, but in the long run their stance is almost certainly going to be recognized as obstructionist and ineffective. The problem is that the climate change costs of carbon-intensive activities are not borne primarily by either the industries that use carbon or by consumers who purchase their products. Unless we pass some sort of carbon-pricing scheme, our economy will increasingly be placed in jeopardy because the American business and consumers are not being given accurate information on inputs and outputs. This will tend to drive economic growth and innovations into increasingly unproductive areas. We'll continue to dominate the global market for SUVs, but cede leadership on solar panels to others.
For more responses, go to http:/
