Articles by Clark Williams-Derry

Cap-and-trade vs. a carbon tax

I don't know what to say about this article, which is largely a critique of a grandfathered "cap-and-trade" system for reducing greenhouse emissions.

On the one hand, I shouldn't complain. Any serious discussion in the press of climate policy is welcome. But on the other hand -- jeez, is it so hard to get climate policy right?

My problem isn't so much that the article gets things wrong (though it does). It's that it tells, at most, half the story of cap-and-trade -- not even the important half.

Greased lightning

Here's an interesting biodiesel stat:

[T]he region's supply of fryer grease is limited. Each Oregonian contributes about a gallon of used cooking oil a year to the grease market. [Emphasis added.]

That's really not much grease -- especially considering that Oregon residents consume about a gallon and a half of highway fuels per person each day. So as much as I love biodiesel, fryer grease just isn't going to power rush hour.

What will it take to reduce Washington state GHG emissions 10 million tons by 2020?

Earlier this year, the governor of Washington set an ambitious goal (PDF): reducing the state's greenhouse-gas emissions by 10 million tons by 2020. That would put the state's emissions back to about where they were in 1990 -- roughly an 11 percent decline, all told, from today's levels.

Of course, that's only a start. Real climate leadership will require reductions on the order of 80 to 90 percent by the middle of this century. Still, a 10-million-ton reduction in annual CO2 emissions seems like a tall order -- especially since the U.S. Census Bureau projects that the state's population will grow by 20 percent between now and 2020. Measured per person, Washingtonians' greenhouse emissions will have to fall by about one quarter by 2020 to meet the goal.

The Washington Department of Ecology recently asked us what it would take to meet that 10-million-ton goal. Based on emissions data compiled by the state (PDF), here's what we came up with:

Do the experts know anything about oil prices?

Finally, after a four-month stretch in which oil prices rose from under $70 to over $95, oil industry analysts seem to have caught on that prices are rising. From Bloomberg news (emphasis added):

Twenty-one of 35 analysts surveyed, or 60 percent, said oil prices will rise through Nov. 9 ... Respondents [had] predicted price drops in the previous 16 weeks.

That's right, for each of the preceding 16 weeks, the consensus of oil industry experts was that prices would fall in the coming week. They were right five times, wrong 11 times -- and crude prices rose by over a third during the stretch. So much for expertise.

Over the longer term, the oil industry analysts haven't fared much better: