ON-Lion Letter
While policymakers and scientists debate the merits of climate-change causation, a multi-billion dollar financial sector has developed around the notion that polluters can offset their carbon pollution with the purchase of a carbon credit.” 

In its ideal form, the concept of carbon trading is that market forces will create an economic incentive to decrease carbon dioxide emissions.  However, according to a late July report from the American Justice Partnership Foundation (AJP) and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, there are critical questions surrounding the faulty assumptions underlying carbon trading.

"Carbon trading, whether in a formal, regulated context or in a voluntary, unregulated context, fails to produce the overall result of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, particularly CO2," according to Global Warming and Carbon Trading:  Failed Solution, the fourth report in AJP's Global Warming Litigation Project Series.  "Based on flawed scientific assumptions linking CO2 emitted through human activity with global climate change, the carbon trading industry has tremendous difficulty in creating stable, marketable commodities that retain consistent value, as evidenced by the collapse of prices in the European market in recent years."

The report also analyzes carbon trading's relationship to the broader global-warming litigation strategy of the plaintiffs' bar.

"Based on developing litigation strategies used by plaintiffs in multi-party global warming lawsuits," it concludes, "the participation of potential defendants in carbon trading may be cited by plaintiffs as evidence of responsibility for global warming causation."

The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation in Milwaukee substantially supports AJP.
Actions: E-mail | Permalink |