Achilles

Should world governments adopt emissions trading to combat global warming?

Yes 36% of users

1. I agree with encouraging reductions in emissions through the financial incentives of emissions trading, because it is a "reward" structure that incentives the production of lower emissions, and succeeds when implemented by a central governing body. Emissions trading would both track and reward companies and consumers on products that produce pollution. When companies research, design, and produce emissions lower than a set point, they are rewarded, and those savings are passed on to the consumer. Both sides win, and the environment benefits. This reduces the costs of cleaning up pollution and caring for the illnesses it causes, so, such a program ends up paying for itself. Yes KoIaBuII

2. Yes, the practice of emission trading should be a universal practice, because it would lower pollution overall. The adoption of universal emission trading by governments will help bring those governments polluting the earth into an alignment with the rest of the world. The practice will give those countries incentive to lower their pollution rate, by being able to make money for doing so. Another fact is the law for polluting will be universal, and have penalties for not obeying, which is another added incentive to lower pollution. Yes NabyR4y

3. Cap and trade would be an effective way to help combat global warming. Cap and trade is not a perfect system, but it is a great way to help combat global warming. By making pollution credits a commodity, the government is able to help regulate the total amount of emissions into the atmosphere. By making pollution credits a commodity, it spurs commerce and allows the greatest polluters to choose to either pay for more credits or lower their emissions. Yes M0r3Fire

4. The failure or inadequacy of previous agreements at Kyoto and Copenhagen points to the need for a new, more flexible approach to the problem. The consequences...