With the creation of a market for mandatory trading of carbon dioxide emissions within the Kyoto Protocol, the London financial marketplace has established itself as ...[text shortened]... of emissions trading as a key tool to mitigate climate change, supported by Green NGOs.[8]
As far as I can tell, this group has one oil company involved (BP) - and from the BP ads that I've seen, this particular company seems to be making a conscious effort to brand itself as a "green" oil company.
So its not like the entire oil industry is jumping on the bandwagon.
Also - if a large number of the big oil companies (and big business in general) were all excited about the lucrative possibilities of "carbon trading", don't you think a whole bunch of GOPs would be pushing for it?
They'd probably be talking about how carbon trading was the fullest expression of free enterprise and entrepreneurialism and calling the Dems a bunch of socialists for not going far enough with the idea.
Originally posted by Melanerpes As far as I can tell, this group has one oil company involved (BP) - and from the BP ads that I've seen, this particular company seems to be making a conscious effort to brand itself as a "green" oil company.
So its not like the entire oil industry is jumping on the bandwagon.
Also - if a large number of the big oil companies (and big business in ge ...[text shortened]... ialism and calling the Dems a bunch of socialists for not going far enough with the idea.
the GOP is not likely to shill publicly for something their electorate is mostly against.
Originally posted by zeeblebot http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/0824/energy-oil-exxonmobil-green-company-of-year.html
On The Cover/Top Stories
ExxonMobil: Green Company of the Year
Christopher Helman, 08.05.09, 06:00 PM EDT
Forbes Magazine dated August 24, 2009
according to the article
Basically, Exxon is doing some extra drilling for natural gas. So if that makes Exxon "green company of the year", then that should make whodey RHP's "green poster of the year" because this is one of the things that whodey strongly favors.
Meanwhile, Exxon is doing a few superficial pieces of nothing involving algae farms to "buy some peace with the environmentalists". It's probably good marketing strategy, but this is hardly jumping on the "green bandwagon".
Originally posted by zeeblebot the GOP is not likely to shill publicly for something their electorate is mostly against.
what they do in private is another matter.
Of course not. The GOP would have to first get their electorate to become mostly for it. Come up with a different name than "cap and trade". Maybe they could call it "energy choice vouchers".
If the GOP can take a basically socialist idea like having the government use tax dollars to heavily subsidize private schooling for poor people and convince everyone that its a "conservative idea", why couldn't they do the same thing for carbon trading?
Originally posted by zeeblebot why do they need to? aren't the Dems all for carbon trading? the GOP can just sit back and not fight it much.
but the Dems would still at least one GOP vote to break the filibuster in the Senate (and probably more because I don't think the Dems are all in favor of it).
it's not that hard an issue. there are probably several Republicans who could vote for this with the Democrats without being penalized by their constituents.
Originally posted by zeeblebot it's not that hard an issue. there are probably several Republicans who could vote for this with the Democrats without being penalized by their constituents.
If the GOP really is secretly pushing for this, maybe the Dems will put this issue off for a year - after all the economy is a more pressing issue anyway. Then when the GOP gets control of Congress in the upcoming elections, let the GOP be the ones to push it.
pro- vs. con- AGW funding: $100B+ vs. $100M+
21 Apr '10 18:05
Back to Top