Author Archives: Eric Cesnik

Worried About Fugitive Methane Emissions from Fracking? Embrace Pure Cap-and-Dividend

This entry was posted in Back to Basics, carbon tax, Natural Gas, Pure Cap-and-Dividend, Science on by .

The current debate over “fugitive methane emissions” from natural gas systems – meaning emissions of unburned gas from the drilling site and from leakage in the natural gas transportation and distribution pipelines – illustrates the need for a broad-based climate policy.  Pure Cap-and-Dividend answers this need, covering as many anthropogenic (human-caused) sources of greenhouse gas […]

Read More ...

Deadline Today for Keystone XL Comments

This entry was posted in Keystone, Obama on by .

Today is your last chance to provide an official comment to the State Department regarding whether the Keystone pipeline expansion should be approved.  Most environmental organizations are urging the president to block the pipeline – 350.org suggests that if he approves Keystone XL, Obama will become the “pipeline president” – but is stopping Keystone XL […]

Read More ...

Global Warming Sure Can Be Cold: Cold Snaps and Climate Reversals

This entry was posted in Conservatives, Science on by .

Record cold weather on the East Coast this winter emboldened a few climate change skeptics to make some pretty interesting remarks.  Rush Limbaugh went on a rant, complaining that the media “just created” the concept of the polar vortex to explain the recent cold snap.  (Never mind that the concept has been around for over […]

Read More ...

The Snickers Effect: Addressing a Conservative’s Doubts About the Human Contribution to Climate Change

This entry was posted in Conservatives, Pure Cap-and-Dividend, Science on by .

After seeing my most recent update on LinkedIn, my conservative friend Michael Perullo responded to express some doubts about Pure Cap-and-Dividend, my proposal to cap greenhouse gas emissions.  Mike wrote: “We must dramatically reduce OUR greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change? No matter the incentives, how could man ever MATERIALLY impact atmospheric CO2? There […]

Read More ...

Decoding the “Price on Carbon” Jargon – Part II

This entry was posted in Back to Basics, carbon tax, Pure Cap-and-Dividend on by .

In today’s New York Times, Coral Davenport reports, “More than two dozen of the nation’s biggest corporations, including the five major oil companies, are planning their future growth on the expectation that the government will force them to pay a price for carbon pollution as a way to control global warming.” That’s great news.  And […]

Read More ...

Decoding the “Price on Carbon” Jargon

This entry was posted in Back to Basics, carbon tax, Pure Cap-and-Dividend on by .

Academics serious about addressing the climate crisis agree: we need to put a price on carbon.  But it’s tough to sell an idea without a shared vocabulary and many people are unclear about what this phrase – “put a price on carbon” – even means.  Still more are puzzled by terms like “cap-and-trade,” “fee-and-dividend,” and […]

Read More ...

“Cap-and-Trade Is Beautiful” Becomes “Cap Carbon Now”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on by .

For better or worse, it’s not just what we say, it’s how we say it.  I have changed this website’s name from “Cap-and-Trade Is Beautiful” to “Cap Carbon Now” for several reasons.   First, “Cap Carbon Now” offers the reader a call to action as opposed to, well, an observation.  Second, it emphasizes the most important […]

Read More ...