The only way RGGI is going to happen nationwide is if big-oil gets their knees capped; and with congress protecting big-oil, that's never going to happen.

Nine New England States:). Let me see. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachussets, Connecticut and Rhode Island. That's only six. This lack of accuracy creates a credibility issue on the entire report.

Blog also says... "Nine Northeastern states established the RGGI." ..... sounds accurate to me! Anyway..... "We the People," should have total control over the entire energy sector, a non-profit one.

Cap-and-Trade is just a scam to enable more financial/bankster speculators to make enormous profits while producing nothing, doing nothing & achieving nothing. World's #1 climatologist, James Hansen, has long been a critic of Cap-and-Trade, instead proposing a much simpler, non-speculative, revenue neutral carbon tax and dividend.

Let's see, a bankster style cap-and-trade system to reduce those >30 thousand Mexican Drug Cartel killings. Give each Drug Gang a cap on the number of citizens they can murder, set at the current level. And they can make a tidy profit trading their killings with another upstart gang that wants to kill also. The hippie non-violent weed producers who sell their product but kill nobody receive no benefit, no subsidies for them. But the brutal drug cartels can use their quota to kill the hippies to eliminate the competition.

And Wall St Bankters can buy killings credits from drug cartels that haven't kept up their killings level and then make a tidy profit selling their killings credits to other drug cartels. How wonderful is that.

http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/289773/europes_failing_ca...

Jim Hansen on Cap-and-Trade:

".... It is possible – if we give politicians a cold, hard slap in the face. The fraudulence of the Copenhagen approach – “goals” for emission reductions, “offsets” that render ironclad goals almost meaningless, the ineffectual “cap-and-trade” mechanism – must be exposed. We must rebel against such politics as usual. Governments going to Copenhagen claim to have such goals for 2050, which they will achieve with the “cap-and-trade” mechanism. They are lying through their teeth. Instead, the United States signed an agreement with Canada for a pipeline to carry oil squeezed from tar sands. Australia is building port facilities for large increases in coal export. Coal-to-oil factories are being built. Coal-fired power plants are being constructed worldwide. Governments are stating emission goals that they know are lies – or, if we want to be generous, they do not understand the geophysics and are kidding themselves..."

This is how you solve the Climate Change crisis:

"....At that point, we’ll be back to the 1940s can-do, will-do, mindset. The attitude that anything is possible. I really don’t think most people understand how countries mobilised and committed themselves during World War II. Winning was everything — it was a matter of life and death — the difference between the survival or downfall of a nation and political ideology. Military spending went from 2 — 5 % of GDP to 35 — 60 % for the major powers. The US diverted most of its automobile factories to making an extraordinary 300,000 planes and a vast naval fleet (the emergency shipbuilders). Russia produced over 50,000 T-34 tanks within the space of a few years, and threw millions of men against the German war machine, losses be damned. Japan was going to fight tooth-and-nail on the home islands, with millions of projected causalities,.."

"...If society realises that it has to build 10,000 nuclear power plants in a period of 20 years, then it’ll do it (as others have pointed out, things happened incredibly fast in the early years of nuclear power — the first 15 years saw a staggering rate of technical development). We’ll find the way to make it happen — of that I have little doubt...."

Yes, those are good numbers, I thought Thom's claim about reducing electricity prices was bogus. You don't add an expensive Cap-and-Trade system without prices going up - one way or another, politicans often like to hide those cost increases, but they are still there.

A common fallacy amongst the religious greens and spin doctor politicians is their belief that correlation = causation. BC politicians always likes to claim how successful their Carbon tax has been at reducing emissions. But in fact almost all of the reduction are accountable by the recession of 2008 and increased exporting of industry overseas. As with Obama's lower emissions claims, as well some replacement of Coal with NG, but Obama's spin doctors don't count the high GHG potential of methane emissions from Shale Gas. And increased coal exports, not counted.