There's only one thing to take to a Kenyan election victory feast: a goat. Preferably still breathing - “a sign of freshness“ - and with big testicles, apparently the sign of quality breeding.
Well, you voted for him...
How much will the Senate's Global Warming bill cost us?
Well, we don't know. But we do know that the law will be structured around the cost of carbon dioxide emitted. So the question becomes, how do we measure it? (A better sentence would have been... how do we determine the amount of carbon per source?)
Here is how.
Now, if you have read the link, you know that burning a gallon of gasoline produces 20 pounds of carbon.
So, what's the cost?
In Europe, where permits to emit carbon have been trading since 2005, it now costs nearly $40 to emit a ton of carbon.
Now, if your car is tagged as a 20MPG car, if you drive it 1000 miles, you will have used 50 gallons.... that's 1000 pounds of carbon... or a half of a ton.. or $20. or 2cents a mile... or if you drive 30,000 miles a year that's $600.00 or $50.00 per month. Have two cars? $100 a month.. Of course the Demos will want a special "second car permit." Cost unknown.
For absolutely no reason other than the desire of the Environmental Wackos to run the world.
And carbon comes from many places, including when you breath, how much you breath and how fast....
Wanna have sex with your significant other?? Sorry. You have exceeded your carbon production allowance... And no cheating! And yes... in spite of what Clinton said, a BJ is having sex...
And, of course, that is gasoline. Coal is different, and will vary based on type of coal, but as an example:
Complete combustion of 1 short ton (2,000 pounds) of this coal will generate about 5,720 pounds (2.86 short tons) of carbon dioxide.
So for every ton that your utility burns to produce electricity, they will have to pay $114.40 or not produce electricity.
Can you see your electric bill costing $500 a month???
A central authority (usually a government or international body) sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant that can be emitted. Companies or other groups are issued emission permits and are required to hold an equivalent number of allowances (or credits) which represent the right to emit a specific amount. The total amount of allowances and credits cannot exceed the cap, limiting total emissions to that level. Companies that need to increase their emission allowance must buy credits from those who pollute less. The transfer of allowances is referred to as a trade. In effect, the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than was needed. Thus, in theory, those that can easily reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at the lowest possible cost to society.[
The cap: Each large-scale emitter, or company, will have a limit on the amount of greenhouse gas that it can emit. The firm must have an “emissions permit” for every ton of carbon dioxide it releases into the atmosphere.
The trade: It will be relatively cheaper or easier for some companies to reduce their emissions below their required limit than others. These more efficient companies, who emit less than their allowance, can sell their extra permits to companies that are not able to make reductions as easily. This creates a system that guarantees a set level of overall reductions, while rewarding the most efficient companies and ensuring that the cap can be met at the lowest possible cost to the economy.
The profits: If the federal government auctions the emissions permits to the companies required to reduce their emissions, it would create a large and dependable revenue stream......
Initial estimates by the Congressional Budget Office project that an economy-wide cap-and-trade program would generate at least $50 billion per year, but could reach up to $300 billion. Approximately 10 percent of this revenue should be allocated to help offset costs to businesses and shareholders of affected industries. Of the remaining revenue, approximately half should be devoted to help offset any energy price increases for low- and middle-income Americans that may occur as a result of the transition to more efficient energy sources. The other half of the remaining revenue should be used to invest in renewable energy, efficiency, low-carbon transportation technologies, green-collar job training, and the transition to a low-carbon economy.....
Philip Busse, the St. Olaf College professor who admitted to stealing campaign signs in a national political blog read by millions, has resigned.
St. Olaf spokesman David Gonnerman issued the following statement Monday afternoon:
"The St. Olaf College administration first learned of Phil Busse's self-admitted theft and destruction of campaign signs on the morning of Oct. 31 as a result of his posting on the Internet.
"The St. Olaf administration immediately referred the matter to local law enforcement authorities and commenced an investigation of its own.
"Mr. Busse has tendered his resignation and is no longer affiliated with St. Olaf College.
"In a statement issued on Friday, the administration made clear that Mr. Busse's actions were in direct conflict with the college's values and mission and that the college did not in any way condone them.
"The statement also declared that St. Olaf College deplores unlawful interference with political campaigns and expression of speech.
"Mr. Busse had a one-semester temporary visiting appointment to teach one course in introductory media studies for the college during the fall term."
Busse was also charged with misdemeanor theft after confessing to the Rice County Sheriff’s department that he took three McCain/Palin yard signs, said Sergeant Dave Stensrud of the Rice County Sheriff’s Office.