You are on page 1of 5

Notorio, Isaac Nicholas N.

October 7, 2013
College of Science/BS Chemistry Position Paper
2013-25581 Eng 10 THR3
Securing Humanitys Future
Climate change, these recent times, became an alarm for everyone that tells us to move and change
our actions hoping that the environment will recover from the damage caused by humans self-benefiting
activities. This environmental degradation started since the world entered the age of industrialization.
Technology utilize resources to satisfy our economic interests without noticing that it gathers the effects until
it is sufficient to disturb us, to disturb everyone.
A way to solve the problem of climate change is to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gases to a level where it will not affect the worlds climate anymore, in other words, to stabilize
the gases concentration in the atmosphere. But how can we stabilize the carbon dioxide concentration if CO2
is still emitted in very large amounts? Different economic activities are the sources of greenhouse gases and
those that produce electricity contribute the most as they burn fossil fuels to power up commercial and
residential establishments. Industries that process raw materials also add up largely to greenhouse gas
emissions (United States, Global Emissions).
Today, many ways are suggested so that we can reduce our carbon footprints. One of the known
ways is the reduce, reuse, recycle where people are encouraged to lessen their wastes that it will not add up
to the carbon footprints. Others are proposing to shift to the use of renewable energy like solar, geothermal
and hydroelectric energy that do not require the burning of fossil fuels that releases harmful gases. They also
recommend the use of green stuff such as cars and home appliances that are energy efficient, thus, less
carbon emissions. Reforestation is also seen as an effective measure because forests absorb large amounts of
carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Some look at the government as the key to curb climate change as they can implement programs that
will reduce and regulate carbon emissions especially from sectors that have the large percentage of
greenhouse gas emissions. A program that will control everyones contribution to the changing climate and
this situation calls for a cap and trade system that is very suitable and the more effective strategy, so far, to
stop the continuing destruction of the environment. It has been suggested by politicians, economists and
even environmentalists and scientists. It also has been started in some parts of the world, example is the
European Union (Chestney).
Cap and trade is considered the most sensible approach to regulate greenhouse gas emissions which
worsen climate change. A cap puts a limit on emissions and it is gradually lowered over a period while trade
refers to the market that will be created where allowances or permits to emit are sold and bought
(Environmental Defense Fund).
Cap and trade has a clear objective that will benefit the environment. The cap must be met and once
achieved, there will be a guaranteed decrease in emissions. Aside from its environmental benefit, cap and
trade will also benefit the economy. It can increase revenues that can be used in investing for a greener
economy and as a subsidy to those who will be affected by changes in prices of commodities like energy as
prices may go higher because of the shift to green energy. The cap and the prices of permits may affect prices
too (Andersen and Sullivan).
Emissions are the first thing to be controlled because of its role in climate change and regulating
them is the main target of cap and trade. Companies, industries and other sources of pollution are covered by
the reducing emissions policy of cap and trade. They will be given allowances that set the maximum amount
of emissions they can produce in a year. This cap put on their emissions will force them to shift to greener
technology with the aim of meeting the imposed limit.
If they cannot hold to quick transition because of any reason, they can buy permits to those who
successfully achieved the goal and have permits to spare. Still, their emissions will be controlled because the
number of permits will be fixed and if they fail they can be given penalties or they can buy permits again until
they have moved to the use of skills and equipment that are not harmful to the environment. Companies can
earn from selling their extra allowances, and from issuing permits, the government can collect revenue that
can be used for social services and emergency fund that can be used during calamities.
Many environmentalists, economists, and politicians oppose cap and trade. They argue that imposing
a type of tax would be more efficient. They also said that prices will be predictable when a tax is imposed
instead of cap and trade (Carbon Share). A tax on commodities and services that leave a carbon footprint will
make the prices higher pushing the people to choose others that are cheaper and that basically produce less
emissions. Also, a tax, they said, is easier to implement (Pierobon).
A tax does not show that emission reduction is certain. It does not certify that people will turn
towards less carbon footprint and puts to doubt if the quantity of emissions can be reduced within a time
period (Stevenson). For example, increasing taxes on alcoholic beverages and tobacco products will not
definitely make users avoid these vices. While a cap will drive the people reduce their carbon emissions so as
to not to exceed the maximum amount of emissions set. A cut-off in emissions is certain unlike in taxation
that does not clearly set a limit on emissions.
Regarding its easy implementation, both programs are not easy to implement because a legislation is
required before they can be applied and both are sophisticated since monitoring is needed to ensure
emissions decrease and satisfy the countrys target (International Emissions Trading Association). The
compliance of the public needs to be checked too to prevent those who are faking that they not going beyond
the limit given to them.
Price volatility or the sudden change in prices of allowances due to cap and trade can be solved easily,
as what economists suggest, by setting safety valves and by auctioning the carbon quotas or the allowances to
pollute. A safety valve is a maximum price on allowances put when demand is high on allowances to prevent
fluctuations in prices of allowances. Auctioning allowances makes the prices stabilize that also prevents
increase in the price of emissions. These mechanisms form flexible caps that adjust when prices are too high
(Andersen and Sullivan).
Another issue on cap and trade is that it will drive companies to cheat and to emit more than the
prescribed limit as what Annie Leonard said on her video, The Story of Cap & Trade (Leonard). However,
cheating will be impossible and governments that will implement cap and trade will be responsible in
scrutinizing these companies and that permits will not be used by those who will sell these permits just to
earn money. As cap and trade is a wide-ranging program that covers all sectors that are related to greenhouse
gas emissions, the government can simplify the program and just apply this only to major emitters to avoid
the problem in its enforcement. The government can also auction allowances because auctioning allowances
eliminates windfall profits, provides money for clean energy development and helps low-income ratepayers
(Andersen and Sullivan).
Cap and trade is a product of thinking solutions to avoid the effects of climate change. This is a sign
that humans are caring for the environment and aware that they will suffer the consequences of their neglect
and ignorance. The world needs a solution to this problem before it is too late.
Cap and trade offers two things that are badly needed in todays situation. First, it assures us a
decrease in carbon pollution. The government sets a maximum amount of carbon to be emitted within a year
and everyone that is connected to the use of fossil fuels that ranges from transportation to electricity
generation is required to reduce their emissions. Every year, the cap will be lowered and it will result to the
change of technology used by different industries so that they can still meet the quota on pollution. It will be
a kind of technology that does not utilize fossil fuels leading to less carbon pollution.
Second, it produces money. The government can earn money from distributing allowances to each
company. The revenue collected can then be invested for greener economy and can be released for low-
income earners to help them once the accompanying price hikes happen. Companies can also earn from
selling their extra allowances brought about by their successful innovations to meet or arrive under the limit.
Cap and trade presents itself as a solution but not as the only and perfect solution. It may not
succeed when applied to certain countries but it can guarantee a change on those who contribute to most of
the greenhouse gases emitted and they are the industrialized countries. On the side of the developing
countries like the Philippines, it will be a great help if it is carried out, though emissions on this countries are
not so huge compared to the developed ones, to reduce their pollution in the air and might benefit the people
and its future.
It cannot be claimed that it has no drawbacks. It may not work out if there will be an opposition on
the part of the legislators and of the people as well. If there is doubt on its effectiveness, it can be
implemented on a small portion of the country and it can be modified too to suit the specific needs of an
area. In the European Union, it encountered some problems at first but then it became an achievement after
some trials (Chestney). Cap and trade answers most of the problems and in the long run will do good to the
country and to the world.

You might also like