Jefferson Review
"Your Liberty is Our Interest"
Home / Archives / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar
|
|
Jefferson Review |
|
|
"Your Liberty is Our Interest" |
April 23, 2007 | |
|
Home / Archives / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar |
||
|
|
A Dangerous Corporate Currency By Richard Lewis Can a business sell its pollution credits to another county, state or nation, thereby limiting future employment opportunities for your community? Pollution credits are actually a new form of money based on dirty air and dirty water. This new money is held mostly by business, and its promoters see it as a universal currency, a currency that is more secure than dollars, the value of which is secured only by debt. A ton of S04, S02 and C02, if KYOTO supporters have their way, is a ton anywhere in our world, and these credits are more valuable than gold, because regulations will not permit corporations to produce goods or services unless they own enough pollution credits. If corporations are allowed to freely trade pollution credits across the borders of counties, states and nations, they will control a universal currency that allows them to exercise a form of global corporate governance! Pollution credits are issued through a title V application process. In order to do business, any company that will produce pollutants regulated by the EPA Act must first submit a plan for its physical plant that will limit its emissions to the approved standards. The title V permit is literally a permit that will allow that plant to emit a given amount of those pollutants. Corporate Pollution credits are deposited in a state or county airbank. Please note, the title V permit process would be no less effective if those credits had no financial value and could not be sold or traded to another corporation. "According to the Electric Power Research Institute, the total value of carbon dioxide permits could be worth $13,000bn by 2050. The opportunities for trading permits and their derivatives could be immense." [ Excerpt from November 4, 1999 FINANCIAL TIMES.... CLIMATE CHANGE: A bull market in hot air ] http://www.envifi.com/News/ft110499.htm
When a corporation moves out of your town or city, it retains ownership of "pollution credits", which another industry may need to open a new plant that will replace lost jobs. [9] Pollution credit trading is a big business; and major brokerage firms are involved in the pollution-credit trading scheme. [10] [11]
When a "corporate citizen" leaves town, but refuses to sell its credits, it restricts that county’s ability to bring in new business! How can a corporation "which is for the purpose of law is a single citizen" legitimately be granted the power to limit a county’s ability to replace lost jobs? [ 3] paragraph 16 [7] Should "corporate citizens" be allowed to trade or sell pollution credits? Some pollution credits are already being traded across international borders. Those trades represent more than a transfer of money or pollution credits. They represent an agreement whereby the corporation or individual selling those credits controls or possibly restricts the future economic growth of a town, city, state or country. That decision is made by a corporation or an individual citizen acting in its own interest. Please note, these decisions are not made by elected representatives and are not necessarily in the best interest of Kentucky or these United States! Please click on the preceding link
"[3]" and note that Ford motor company would not say how much it paid
Phillip Morris for pollution credits it needed to expand truck production in
Louisville, Kentucky. What would happen if Phillip Morris had refused to sell
its credits when its plant left Louisville? If Phillip Morris had dragged its
feet, would Ford Motor company have expanded production in another state? The
story link makes it clear that our Governor recognized those credits were the
property of Phillip Morris and that he would not take an MODEL EMISSION LEGISLATION for KENTUCKY Legislation should be introduced immediately at the state level, that will guarantee that no town or city’s ability to replace lost employment will be restricted for even a single day as a result of emission credits held by a corporation which has closed or is leaving a community in Kentucky. This legislation should specify that no local, state, or federal taxes will be levied to repurchase emission credits presumed to have been owned or held by any corporation or individual nor will any financial instruments or artifice of any form be issued by any government for that purpose. Legislation should be introduced immediately at the county and state level that in plain language specifies under what conditions if any emission credits may be traded across county, state or international borders. Oversight legislation should be introduced immediately at the state and federal level, that will provide for a "yearly transparent public audit" of all emission credits held by every corporation doing business in Kentucky. A transparent audit is needed to provide transparent public accountability for the emissions program. Legislation
should be introduced immediately at the county, state and
federal level that in plain language specifies how C02 sequestration credits
will impact property tax values for farmers and rural land owners if KYOTO is
adopted by these United States.
Some interesting cites: "According to the Electric Power Research Institute, the total value of carbon dioxide permits could be worth $13,000bn by 2050. The opportunities for trading permits and their derivatives could be immense." [ Excerpt from November 4, 1999 FINANCIAL TIMES.... CLIMATE CHANGE: A bull market in hot air ] http://www.envifi.com/News/ft110499.htm "If there is good news in the closing of the Phillip Morris cigarette plant in Louisville, it is that in the short term, it will mean cleaner air. That's because Phillip Morris is one of Jefferson County's largest sources of smog-forming pollution. In the longer term, the plant closing could help efforts to attract new industry, expand existing plants or even give owners of new cars a break from vehicle emissions testing." Excerpt from Courier Journal article "Closing will free up emission 'credits' " by ANDREW MELNYKOVYCH, Monday March 1st 1999 "In the last month, Canadian energy companies
have struck two large deals in which they paid others to fulfill their
commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions. In one transaction, they paid Iowa
farmers to refrain from tilling their farmland, "Jay Pruett last year spent US$5.4 million of his company’s money to plant a forest in Brazil. He’s not planning to cut timber or build a resort. But he means to put those trees to work." "Pruett, environmental services director for Central & South West Corporation, a large Dallas-based utility company, is counting on the trees to do what comes naturally: absorb carbon dioxide produced by animals, factories and cars, and emit oxygen into the atmosphere. He’s tapping into an emerging market spanning from San Jose, Costa Rica to Sydney, Australia that seeks to assign a price per ton of carbon dioxide processed by trees." [ Excerpt From September 2000 LATIN TRADE MAGAZINE A Virgin Forest Market? ] http://www.envifi.com/News/latintrade0900.htm TORONTO (CP) _ Ontario Hydro earned nearly $500,000 by selling pollution reduction credits to a Connecticut company that needed them to satisfy state regulatory orders to improve air quality. http://free_pres.tripod.com/pollutio.htm#Ontario Greenhouse Gas Revision To Deliver Massive Financial Bonus For Australia, says Institute http://www.tai.org.au/MediaReleases_Files/MediaReleases/MRGreenhouseGas300899.htm The international pollution credit scheme, gives "corporate citizens" unprecedented control over the economic future of counties, states and even countries? How many pollution credits do the foreign owned plants operating in these United States control? [1] Who's making the laws? http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27334 [2] EPA hires million-dollar lobbyist http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27501 [3] Ford buys Philip Morris air pollution credits (June 30, 2000 print edition of Business First ) ..... Copy this address into your web browser http://www.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2000/07/03/story2.html [6] Blueprint for Cleaner Skies Under Fire (The Christian Science Monitor Monday July 28, 1997 Edition) http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1997/07/28/us/us.1.html [7]
GOLDEN RULES FOR TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION Cited: 46 Duke L. J. 931 [9] http://www.eenews.net/subscriber/search/data/greenwire/1997/02/g970219.6.html [10] Selected Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reductions Trading Resources http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWeinstein/greenhou.htm [11] Cantor Fitzgerald Environmental Brokerage Services http://www.emissionstrading.com/ November 4, 1999 FINANCIAL TIMES Comment and Analysis CLIMATE CHANGE: A bull market in hot air http://www.envifi.com/News/ft110499.htm Credit for Early Implementation: Kyoto through the Front Door http://www.cei.org/gencon/004,01555.cfm Early Action Crediting: Growing the Kyoto Lobby at Small Business' Expense http://www.cei.org/gencon/004,01557.cfm LATIN TRADE MAGAZINE A Virgin Forest Market? http://www.envifi.com/News/latintrade0900.htm Greenhouse Gas Revision To Deliver Massive Financial Bonus For Australia, says Institute http://www.tai.org.au/MediaReleases_Files/MediaReleases/MRGreenhouseGas300899.htm
Members of our Kentucky legislature should be concerned that the E.P.A. authorizes emission credits through a regional compliance model and not a state by state model. The concept of corporations owning emission credits "the right to pollute" has become a mechanism through which a community attempts to lay permanent claim to emission credits that were issued from a regional airbank.... but this concept has given corporations control over economic policy decisions previously made by our elected representatives. [ does the concept of regional emission credits violate our Kentucky Constitution?]
Compliance with EPA environmental standards is not voluntary.
Purchasing over capacity pollution equipment is not just good corporate citizenship it is good business practice. Kentucky businesses would continue purchasing over capacity pollution equipment even if they were not allowed to trade or sell pollution credits:
(1) Over capacity pollution equipment provides a business additional production capacity in periods of high product or service demand.
(2) Over capacity pollution equipment helps a business avoid fines for failure to comply with EPA standards as equipment wears.
(3) Businesses which purchase over capacity pollution equipment are less likely to face legal cost from accusations that they have harmed the health of surrounding communities.
Under existing emission credit trading schemes a business in Kentucky can comply with E.P.A. standards without purchasing equipment with the capacity to meet E.P.A. emission standards at each business location.
Kentucky should develop a new Emission compliance model, a model that requires every Kentucky business to use pollution equipment to meet E.P.A. emission standards at every location.
The children in the west end of Louisville could enjoy the same air quality as the children in the east end.
Kentucky air quality would actually improve providing a real basis for future jobs / economic expansion.
Should there be a yearly transparent public audit of these valuable pollution credits ? [1] [2] Most citizens are not familiar with "pollution credits,". Do "corporate citizens" pay taxes on these valuable assets? Under this current scheme, "corporate citizens" that cannot meet environmental standards can simply purchase "credits," instead of additional equipment, and still comply with environmental regulations. Corporate citizens that operate without adequate pollution equipment can create unnecessary pollution, causing breathing and other problems for the residents of surrounding neighborhoods, and beyond. [6] Of course, allowing "corporate citizens" to continue creating health problems for "living Citizens" and that violates the intent of the Environmental Protection Act! "In another scenario, a local industrial source that must cut air emissions could forego new pollution control equipment by purchasing air pollution credits from another industry that has already cut its emissions below required levels." "Or, a business that would go over its air pollution limit because of a proposed expansion could pay another industry to reduce its air pollutants so the expansion could be completed." http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr052297.htm These issues deserve a serious thoughtful response, from our Gubernatorial candidates! And here are just a few of the questions that all concerned should be asking: Should a yearly public audit of all pollution credits held by Kentucky businesses be available to the public?[yes] [no] If elected what is the candidate willing to do to make a yearly audit available? Should the pollution credit trading system be replaced with a system that requires each "Kentucky business" to meet federal environmental regulations at each business location? [6] [yes] [no] This will allow the children in the West end of town to enjoy the same healthy air quality as the children in the East end of our county, how will the candidate act, to assure the same quality air throughout their entire district or state? Should a "corporate citizen's" decision to sell or keep "pollution credits" interfere with Kentucky's ability to replace lost jobs for its "living Citizens" [7] [yes] [no] ? How will the candidate act to preserve accountable elected representation? Should "corporate citizens" be allowed to trade or sell pollution credits? Purchasing over capacity equipment to meet environmental standards is just sound business judgment. Over-capacity equipment allows a corporation to increase its production when there is high demand for that companies product or service and over-capacity equipment will allow an industry to meet federal pollution standards even after the equipment has significant wear! In any case the cost of pollution equipment is always passed to the consumer! A strict Standards based system / plan would have to be both affordable and realistic. In a strict standards based system "economic reality" would dictate standards.....the program would have to be affordable and realistic for our community. There would be no political slush funds or corporate financial rewards for cooking the environmental books and pretending unlimited economic expansion is possible and compatible with meaningful environmental standards. Kentucky residents know that the candidates response "know that your answers will not be general, broad and evasive"! [4] [5] THE CANDIDATES PHONE NUMBERS AND EMAIL ADDRESSES: [1] Who's making the laws? http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27334 [2] EPA hires million-dollar lobbyist http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27501 [3] Ford buys Philip Morris air pollution credits (June 30, 2000 print edition of Business First ) ..... Copy this address into your web browser http:/www.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2000/07/03/story2.html [6] Blueprint for Cleaner Skies Under Fire
(The Christian Science Monitor Monday July 28, 1997 Edition) http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1997/07/28/us/us.1.html [7] GOLDEN
RULES FOR TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION Cited: 46 Duke L. J. 931 [9] http://www.eenews.net/subscriber/search/data/greenwire/1997/02/g970219.6.html [10] Selected Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reductions Trading Resources http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWeinstein/greenhou.htm [11] Cantor Fitzgerald Environmental Brokerage Services http://www.emissionstrading.com
|
|
Weather (Louisville) / Mapquest / White Pages / Business Search / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN |
|
||
|
|
