<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should we cap and trade, or tax, to reduce carbon emissions?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.owen.org/blog/682/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/682</link>
	<description>Thoughts from Owen in Africa</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:49:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gary Jenkins</title>
		<link>http://www.owen.org/blog/682/comment-page-1#comment-2492</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Jenkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 13:24:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.owen.org/blog/682#comment-2492</guid>
		<description>From a scientific perspective, what is amazing about the Organisations and Markets piece and the subsequent comments chain is the total absence of evidence.&#160;
  O&amp;M say taxes &quot;can be applied quite easily to millions of transportation users by taxing at the pump&quot;.&#160; When the UK government introduced a scheme to increase pump prices a bit faster than inflation, they were forced a few weeks later to back down by lorries blockading the ports.&#160; How &quot;easy&quot; was that?&#160;
  If we ask why emission trading is supposed to work, we are always told about the US scheme to reduce sulphur from coal stations.&#160;&#160;But the&#160;famous benefits of this scheme are based on &lt;strong&gt;ex-ante &lt;/strong&gt;feasibility studies.&#160; The ex-post evaluations paint a very depressing picture (Tietenberg 2006).
  Is it really enough to develop policy by listing some options and them marking them against some arbitrary criteria on the basis of what feels right?&#160;
  &#160;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From a scientific perspective, what is amazing about the Organisations and Markets piece and the subsequent comments chain is the total absence of evidence.&nbsp;<br />
  O&amp;M say taxes &quot;can be applied quite easily to millions of transportation users by taxing at the pump&quot;.&nbsp; When the UK government introduced a scheme to increase pump prices a bit faster than inflation, they were forced a few weeks later to back down by lorries blockading the ports.&nbsp; How &quot;easy&quot; was that?&nbsp;<br />
  If we ask why emission trading is supposed to work, we are always told about the US scheme to reduce sulphur from coal stations.&nbsp;&nbsp;But the&nbsp;famous benefits of this scheme are based on <strong>ex-ante </strong>feasibility studies.&nbsp; The ex-post evaluations paint a very depressing picture (Tietenberg 2006).<br />
  Is it really enough to develop policy by listing some options and them marking them against some arbitrary criteria on the basis of what feels right?&nbsp;<br />
  &nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
