What to Expect from The Carbon Trade Scheme

Known to be one of the queer bedfellows for the longest time, politicians and environmentalists have long had the strangest relationship, and even more today. Our political leaders are aiming to regulate carbon trade, in the hopes of encouraging organizations to use the least amount of energy possible. We are looking at more innovative strategies for the carbon emissions reduction in the future, as the political landscape continues to change.

In 2009, the political landscape was such that the House of Representatives in the United States was able to pass a comprehensive raft of legislation, albeit narrowly. The American Clean Energy and Security Act included a controversial "cap and trade" scheme, somewhat similar to the Emissions trading Scheme in Europe. Despite the efforts required to pass this through the House, little has been achieved since that time in the Senate.

Environmentalist and politicians have always been a strange combination, even more during the present political landscapes. Our legislative leaders struggle to come up with a way to regulate the carbon trade, to ensure that business is, one way or the other, penalized for excess energy consumption. As the political landscape changes, we can see wild swings from one extreme to the other, as various schemes are considered to cut back on carbon emissions.

Carbon trade is the subject of much discussion as the spring unfolds in 2010. A trio of senior senators is hard at work crafting a bill that could at least bring some carbon trade legislation to the floor of the Senate as the year continues. Environmentalists are starting to get frustrated, however, as they see any meaningful legislation that is being watered to to allow passage in the Senate.

The cap and trade scheme proposed by the House of Representatives is likely to have a much more limited reach, initially, under the bill being crafted by Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman. Players in the power sector will be most directly affected by the regulation on the cap and trade, and will eventually cascade to the rest of the sectors to which the scheme shall expand. As the Democrats within the U.S. Senate effectively lost its ability to "steamroller" legislation through when the late Sen. Kennedy's seat fell to a Democrat, from now forward the Republicans have a considerable amount of say in crafting climate legislation. They are known to be against a carbon trade scheme and a number of conciliatory features must be added to any legislation that has a chance of passing during the 2010 sessions.

Many have said that should widespread carbon legislation not materialize from Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency could move itself to try and regulate greenhouse gases. Should the Environmental Protection Agency regulate carbon emissions, for whatever valid reasons such as its being a health hazard, the Republicans will always look at this as an alternative route for the current administration to push forward with the desired reform.

Climate carbon trade restrictions represent some of the most controversial issues for politicians. As carbon emissions are directly linked to energy use, it is felt that no progress can be made in real world terms unless energy use is restricted, efficiencies achieved and alternative energy uses considered. While some state and regional initiatives are underway or in development, another controversial element of the Senate legislation under consideration is that any federal scheme would in turn cause a state or regional scheme to be canceled.

It is definite that in a way or another, each business will have to take a closer look at its energy consumption in order to achieve sustainability through efficient operations, regardless of the passing of a federal carbon trade legislation in 2010.