Green Piece

There are few things we all know and few who know much. That the environment has been changed by what it contains is something we all do know, and most admit to knowing. That the changes are dangerous and demand government action is something most of us can agree on. Failure seems inevitable. This week, near the close of its legislative session, California’s legislature passed and the Governor signed new regulations which would initiate creation of a pollution credit market. Among the many vagaries in the new law, this market may have the best chance of helping and be the most susceptible to the influence of rascals.
In environmental programs since the 1980s there have typically been two ways that governments enjoy restraining pollution. The first are process regulations, commandments specifying how machinery should operate, what ingredients to use or not use, what reports must be presented and how many engineers it should take to screw in a light bulb (we’re still working out the details by candlelight.) The second has been a market-based approach in which polluters are fined for exceeding their quota but the virtuous may sell indulgences to the profligate. Pre-reformation catholicism has been reborn in the halls of political power to reconcile humanity with a fallen world.
California legislators have a very hard time forsaking process regulations and no-one who has spent time in the Capitol in Sacramento would expect legislation completely without an enumeration of sins to be avoided. The inclusion of a carbon market, however is a positive step your correspondent commends. Constraints on process, by nature, limit innovation and the development of new solutions. Artificial markets encourage innovation and help fund new solutions by insuring that those who find better ways can profit from them. The other benefit of the Carbon Market is that it actually partially corrects the failure of the free market to charge polluters for the harm done. Of course the downside is that free markets are subject to fraud, lying and evasion. The risk with a government-run market is that these may be built in. Or remodeled in later.
The enronification of California’s carbon market seems more than likely. It’s a certainty if pollutants organize into unions. Late session bills, when well-intended can escape some of the depredations of special interest groups but when those bills mandate a new bureaucracy the lobbyists get a second crack at polluting the air. Manufacturers will seek an emissions cap they can’t possibly hope to exceed in order to protect California’s economy and tax base. Prospective credit traders will seek a certification process requiring five years of used-car sales experience and no license fees. The Minutemen will propose that the new regulations not take effect until it is proven that no smog blows up from Mexico. The legislators themselves may seek a hot air exemption.
And yet the worst complaint that reputable members of the fourth estate like The Economist and The Los Angeles Times can levy is that California improving it’s air pollution won’t make much difference if the rest of the world fails to. When the wise and reflective raise that irrelevant a complaint, the plan is probably a good one. You can tell a good clean air program by the fumes produced.

The Prattler Wordbook
QUERY, n. Blasphemy and high treason.
QUERY, v.t. To encourage lying.
QUESTION, n. The evidence that standardized test writers aren’t too bright. If you don’t know an antonym for “studied” then you shouldn’t be making up tests for those who are.
QUESTION, v.t. To remisunderstand.
QUEUE, n. A sequence or chain of “U”s and “E”s.
QUIBBLE, v.i, v.t. To negotiate for conflict.
QUIET, adj. Blessed among women. Virtuous. Virginal.
QUILT, n. A labor-intensive sleeping aid.
QUILTING BEE, n. Gossip with real needles.
QUININE, n. A substance used for preventing malaria and flavoring gin. The homeopathic remedy for mindless fever.

Saturday, September 2, 2006