tagged w/ incentives
-
In July 2011, the Brisbane Times reported that Australia’s carbon price was dead in the water. Polling revealed that support for the legislation was low and that Prime Minister Julia Gillard had done a poor job explaining the bill. Down in the trenches, mud was flying: a politician compared a progressive activist organization supporting the carbon price, GetUp!, to the Hitler Youth League (GetUp!, by the way, is also the organization that produced this moving and wildly viral video in support of marriage equality last fall).
Despite ferocious opposition, the carbon price squeaked through the Australian parliament months later, sending a jolt of optimism through the global community. Like other climate bills, it ended up being pockmarked with holes gaping enough to drive an SUV through, but one of the largest per-capita carbon emitters in the world was clearly willing to throw its hat in the ring on climate action. The skeptics had been proven wrong.
Here in the U.S., activists perked up at news of Australia’s carbon price but overall seem hardened to federal policy after the American Clean Energy and Security Act failed to pass in 2010 (many environmentalists were opposed to the hulking and imperfect bill anyway, adding another layer of ambivalence). And don’t even mention the attitude in Congress. “We’re busy enough fighting off attacks on the EPA” is the mantra Democratic Congressmembers and environmentalists alike are fond of repeating these days.
But like crocus bulbs shifting under the frozen ground, a movement has been building for federal climate policy. And the time is right: belief in climate change among the general public has just taken an upward turn, according to Brookings.
Partly due to the pressure applied by groups like Citizens Climate Lobby, politicians and other leaders are beginning to warm up the public on carbon pricing.
NASA Climate Scientist James Hansen has been promoting fee-and-dividend legislation for years, recently appearing on MSNBC with Treehugger’s Brian Merchant. Soon after, the Washington Post editorial page released a small flurry of pieces on carbon taxation. First, that famous tag-team, Reps. Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, along with former Republican House members Sherwood Boehlert and Wayne Gilchrest , endorsed a carbon price in an op-ed:
We could slash our debt by making power plants and oil refineries pay for the carbon emissions that endanger our health and environment. This policy would strengthen our economy, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, keep our skies clean — and raise a lot of revenue.
Then the paper’s fickle editorial board endorsed Pete Stark’s existing carbon tax bill (H.R. 3242 – the Save Our Climate Act) currently languishing in committee. Leadership on the issue from politicians, even from well-known liberals like Stark, is sorely needed. Especially when the public, for better or worse, forms opinions based on their statements.
The LA Times editorial page, too, has been drumming up support for a carbon tax. Their neighbor to the north, British Columbia, passed a carbon tax three years ago and the evidence of its success is a hopeful sign.
Just do it. Put a price on carbon, one way or another. How much is levied, and where and exactly how it’s levied, aren’t as important as the principle that we all pay something for emissions.
In Canada — and in California — it will take time, and trial and error, to get climate change regulations off the ground and working. It’s difficult, yes. Complicated too. But it’s not economic or political suicide.
One can’t deny some heavy lifting is in order, but with luck we can learn from our past missteps. The environmental community will need to better communicate its goals, think outside the insular lobbying strategies of yore, and truly work with groups across the political and interest spectrum from unions and environmental justice groups to business and religious leaders, and especially Republicans.
That last point may seem like a joke in the current political climate but behind the scenes, many Republicans do support a carbon tax. David Roberts of Grist has even gone as far as calling carbon pricing a fundamentally conservative policy. Case in point: Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney’s economic advisor Gregory Mankiw is a strong proponent of a carbon tax, and his observations about the resistance to the policy reflect Roberts’ own:
In the debate over global climate change, there is a yawning gap that needs to be bridged. The gap is not between environmentalists and industrialists, or between Democrats and Republicans. It is between policy wonks and political consultants.
Among policy wonks like me, there is a broad consensus. The scientists tell us that world temperatures are rising because humans are emitting carbon into the atmosphere. Basic economics tells us that when you tax something, you normally get less of it. So if we want to reduce global emissions of carbon, we need a global carbon tax. Q.E.D.
We’re encouraged by statements from conservatives like Mankiw, Boehlert and Gilchrest, but what’s really moving us these days is the growing army of committed citizen lobbyists around the country we’ve seen jump into the lion’s den. They’re inspiring us to rethink our rote pessimism, and the idea that the general public can’t be rallied around this issue.
More at the linkIn July 2011, the Brisbane Times reported that Australia’s carbon price was dead... more
-
-
The world's largest seed company, Monsanto, announced Wednesday that its quarterly profits surged nearly 80 percent.
But the news was clouded somewhat by another announcement that the biotechnology giant was under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission for offering incentives to distributors who sell its herbicides.
The company's herbicide division, which includes the flagship product, Roundup, has struggled in recent years, losing ground to cheaper, generic alternatives from China. In 2009 and 2010, Monsanto began offering incentives to customers to use Roundup in an attempt to shore up the brand.
On Wednesday, Monsanto executives said the SEC had launched a probe into the incentive programs and that the agency has subpoenaed documents.
The company also announced that farmers responded positively to new corn and soybean products this spring, helping push up profits for the third quarter nearly 80 percent to $680 million. Sales of the company's corn, soybean and cotton traits rose 12 percent in the quarter, to $2.6 billion.
Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/article_a4b71892-a25b-11e0-959d-001a4bcf6878.html#ixzz1Qp27TVNG
More at the link
http://www.sott.net/image/image/s2/55134/full/Food_Chain_by_Monsanto.jpgThe world's largest seed company, Monsanto, announced Wednesday that its... more
-
-
In addition to my internship here with Sustainable Schmidt, I’ve been spending some time interning with San Mateo County government for their Energy Upgrade program. This statewide incentive program provides rebates for homeowners who want to increase the energy efficiency of their homes. This program is unique in that it helps you to “upgrade” the comfort and efficiency of the home as a whole – not just single products like PG&E’s rebates. Each county in the Bay Area has their respective branches to this program. Rebate amount goes from $1000-$4000, depending on how much you improve your efficiency by. My goal by the end of the summer is to convince my dad to retrofit our home with this program. With any luck, we’ll be able to combine them with other rebates and tax credits. If you’re looking for a comprehensive list of all the different rebates in your area, check out the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency.
https://energyupgradeca.org/overview
Ever really thought about what that tree in front of your house does for you? The Colorado Tree Coalition has written a comprehensive list of the Benefits of Trees in Urban Areas. I understood the obvious benefits of urban forests like carbon sequestration and reduced run-off, but had never considered how trees in neighborhoods would strengthen its community, or helps slow traffic.
http://www.coloradotrees.org/benefits.htm#10
I’m halfway through Cradle to Cradle by William McDonough & Michael Braungart. These two authors introduce an interesting concept for product life-cycle that draws inspiration from nature itself. Rather than creating products that create unusable waste and degrade the natural environment, a product design that encourages integration of its life with the rest its environment. For example, whereas conventional roofing degrades, overheats, and eventually has to be thrown away, green roofs covered in plants “maintain the roof at a stable temperature, providing free evaporative cooling in hot weather and insulation in cold weather, and shields it from the sun destructive rays, making it last longer.” William McDonough gave a good lecture on TED Talks of this design concept.
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/william_mcdonough_on_cradle_to_cradle_design.html
See the full blog post here: http://www.sustainableschmidt.com/In addition to my internship here with Sustainable Schmidt, I’ve been spending... more
-
-
-
-
eva2
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
If humans didn't work together then the world would surely end. The only way humans can work together is by all parties being relatively satisfied with what they are getting in return. For example: If I asked you to go make me a sandwich you would probably hit or abuse me in some way, unless I was offering you something in return. The internet is a fight for information, with the majority of social content relying on people taking part and participating, but how do you get people to do your bidding?
Continued at link....If humans didn't work together then the world would surely end. The only way... more
-
-
timoto
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
When I started working here at Current TV, one of the first projects I took on was an achievements platform. We designed a rudimentary set of levels for the launch of Current:News with the intent to eventually replace them with achievements, but we never got around to releasing the achievements platform as planned.
There was a lot to be done in preparation of launching achievements, so the concept never went away 100%. Now we are just a few weeks away from unleashing our first batch of achievements.
How will they work?
Various activities, like commenting, voting, and sharing, will count towards earning achievements. When you complete certain numbers of those activities, or perform them in combination with other activities on the site, you could end up unlocking an achievement.
For example, if you comment a certain number of times on the site you may unlock an achievement based on total number of comments. If your comments rack up a certain number positive votes from others in the community, you might unlock a different type of achievement.
Each achievement you unlock will come with a badge that is worth points. Some badges will be worth more than others, and you’ll be able to find a summary of points and badges earned on a shiny new profile page. From time to time we’ll unleash new batches of achievements to unlock. Some will be time-sensitive, and others will require some hunting in order to unlock. But I’ll have more on all of that in a future post.
What does this mean for our existing levels? Better yet, “what about my swag?”
When we launch achievements, we will simultaneously discontinue levels. Yes, we’re sad to see them go. But in many ways this overhaul is long overdue.
Those of you who have worked hard to achieve levels in the system will be rewarded with badges indicating your accomplishments. The coolest part is, these old-school level badges will not be available to anyone joining the site after the new achievements platform launches.
If you're still waiting on a swag pack in the mail, don't fret. You will receive your swag in due time, but we’re a little backed up right now.
Consider this post fair warning if you still hope to achieve level 3 in our old school levels. There will be more swag opportunities via achievements in the future, but those of you who have not reached level 3 when achievements launches in a few weeks will be out of luck as far as swag is concerned.
So get cracking! If you have questions, feel free to hit me up in the comments. I’ll have more to post about this release when launch day comes around.When I started working here at Current TV, one of the first projects I took on was an... more
-
-
The American people simply do not matter to Barack Obama. He said so himself last night as he attempted his first State of the Union Address, declaring, “[W]hen I ran for president, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular -- I would do what was necessary.” This was a nice way of saying he had heard the overwhelming opposition to his Big Government agenda — and he has decided to plow ahead anyway.
“I will not walk away” from the government health care takeover, he said, and “neither should the people in this chamber.” This, in spite of devastating resistance to the scheme that would ration care, raise premiums, drive people off of their insurance, cut benefits, and bankrupt the treasury with over $1.5 trillion in costs over ten years once fully implemented.
All told, 58 percent oppose the plan in Scott Rasmussen’s last weekly poll on the subject. His tracking has been way ahead of the curve on opposition to the health care takeover. While apologists were claiming majority support for plans like the “public option,” Rasmussen has polled clear opposition for most of 2009.
Barack Obama doesn’t care. With only an occasional glance at the glaring reality that the American people really are not in favor of his plans, Obama’s State of the Union was mostly a “stay the course” campaign rally, coupled with blind assertions as to the correctness of his position. Not to mention his bull-headed insistence that the Democrats get it done and “not run for the hills.”
For example, he came close to prevaricating (to put it kindly) about losses from the Troubled Asset Relief Program: “[W]e have recovered most of the money we spent on the banks. To recover the rest, I have proposed a fee on the biggest banks.” Only, the biggest banks are the ones who have paid TARP back in full, with interest.
Most of the $120 billion in losses have arisen under loans to AIG (not a bank), GM (not a bank), and Chrysler (not a bank). It was Obama’s own Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner who testified to Congress, “There is a significant likelihood that we will not be repaid for the full value of our investments in AIG, GM and Chrysler.”
But not to worry, Obama says, “I am not interested in punishing banks.” Only, he is. He asserted that “Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis.” By that, he means, take over, regulate, and monopolize. You know, punish.
Despite all of his bald distortions, Barack Obama’s greatest transgression in this speech was more a sin of omission than commission in his historical account of what actually happened. In fact, the only entities Obama is not interested in targeting are those most directly responsible for the mess.
Obama had positively nothing to say about Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Reserve (government-created entities all), whose errant policies of loose lending and easy money coupled together to incentivize borrowing on an unprecedented level, inflate the housing bubble, sell worthless securities worldwide, and bring the economy to brink of ruin. Not one word.
Even as George Bush was attempting to justify the unprecedented bailouts his Administration ushered in, he at least acknowledged the role played by, for example, too-low interest rates. Instead, Obama presented a bizarre, disjointed address that was almost completely disconnected from reality, save for the touch of icy indifference to the express will of the American people not to proceed on this course.
But then, by now, that is what the American people have come to expect from the imperial, impervious president.The American people simply do not matter to Barack Obama. He said so himself last... more
-
-
Evan Kopelson looks at the incentives to drive America to a low carbon economy, including a cap and trade system, and subsidies of clean energy investments. He looks at the pros and cons of each, and issues recommendations. Evan is president of Green Media Consulting Inc, and founder of Green Media News. He advises on issues of climate change, sustainability, corporate and personal responsibility.Evan Kopelson looks at the incentives to drive America to a low carbon economy,... more
-
-
THE WAXMAN-MARKEY bill on climate change that recently passed the House is a train wreck waiting to happen. Intended to reduce global warming and achieve energy independence, it is totally inadequate in its reliance on a flawed cap and trade system, and the recently released Senate version called the Kerry-Boxer bill follows the same track. Like the House bill, the Senate version represents the further transfer of wealth from taxpayers to the nuclear and fossil-fuel industries - a result of their immense power and influence.
Both bills impose a legal limit or “cap’’ on greenhouse gasses emitted each year. The trading part is based on issuing emission allowances, or permits, to various industries for each ton of greenhouse gas they emit. However, the fatal flaw in Waxman-Markey is the misguided government giveaway, for free, of 85 percent of all allowances, particularly to coal-related industries. For example, the most egregious source of carbon dioxide emissions is coal-fired electrical generating plants, which account for one-third of all such emissions. To mollify the powerful coal lobby and coal state representatives, this government giveaway provides little or no incentive to phase out old coal-fired plants anytime soon, and may diabolically increase their profits.
A lesson is to be learned from the 2005 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme that likewise gave away 95 percent of its emission allowances. The result was that EU electric utilities earned windfall profits while continuing to pass on higher energy costs to industrial and residential consumers. The EU told the US Government Accountability Office that “it could not be certain [the trading scheme] resulted in any reduction of emissions.’’
To successfully confront the climate change crisis and the nation’s addiction to fossil fuels, we at Clean Power Now endorse a straightforward carbon tax instead of the cap and trade schemes. To neutralize the impact on consumers, revenue from the carbon tax would be used to reduce payroll taxes, increase Social Security benefits, and fund renewable energy efforts that create new jobs and new industries particularly in the wind and solar sectors. This would amount to a tax shift with enormous societal benefits.
Others are supporting this as well. Elaine Kamarck, chairwoman of the US Climate Task Force and a former adviser to Al Gore, recently said in Politico, “Congress can go back to Al Gore’s original idea about how to deal with climate change: Raise taxes on carbon, and cut taxes on work. A carbon tax shift is one of those rare ideas that can take a political liability and turn it into a political asset; it allows Congress to vote for a tax cut and a tax increase while putting into place the financial incentives we need to transition to a noncarbon future.’’
A carbon tax is aimed at taxing the upstream source of carbon where it is produced, like coal mines, oil and natural gas wells, as well as shipping terminals and pipelines for imported fuel. Each pound of carbon embedded in the fuel would be taxed based on the fact that every pound of carbon consumed as fuel results in the emission of 3.6 pounds of carbon dioxide. Starting at a tax rate of $15 per ton of emitted carbon dioxide and progressively increasing until the goal of 80 percent reduction is achieved by 2050 is a good place to start.THE WAXMAN-MARKEY bill on climate change that recently passed the House is a train... more
-
-
US President Barack Obama has offered Sudan "incentives" if it acts to improve situation on the ground, unveiling a new policy on Khartoum.
But Mr Obama threatened "increased pressure" if Sudan failed to make progress towards achieving peace.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US remained focused on reversing the "ongoing dire human consequences of genocide" in the Darfur region.
The UN estimates that 300,000 people have died in Darfur since 2003.
In a statement, Mr Obama said: "If the government of Sudan acts to improve the situation on the ground and to advance peace, there will be incentives.
"If it does not, there will be increased pressures imposed by the United States and the international community."
The US has sanctions in place against Khartoum, and President Omar al-Bashir is wanted on an international arrest warrant for crimes against humanity in Darfur.
On Monday, Mr Obama said he would renew tough measures against Khartoum later this week.US President Barack Obama has offered Sudan "incentives" if it acts to... more
-
-
The idea of a tax credit for companies that create new jobs, something the federal government has not tried since the 1970s, is gaining support among economists and Washington officials grappling with the highest unemployment in a generation.
The proposal has some bipartisan appeal among politicians eager both to help their unemployed constituents and to encourage small-business development. Legislators on Capitol Hill and President Obama’s economic team have been quietly researching the policy for several weeks.
“There is a lot of traction for this kind of idea,” said Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the Republican whip. “If the White House will take the lead on this, I’m fairly positive it would be welcomed in a bipartisan fashion.”
In addition to the economists working on the proposal, some heavyweights support the concept, including the Nobel laureate Edmund S. Phelps, Dani Rodrik of Harvard and former Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich.
One version of the approach, to be unveiled next week by the Economic Policy Institute, a labor-oriented research organization, would give employers a two-year tax credit if they increased the size of their work force or added significant hours of work (for example, making a part-time worker full time). Employers would receive a credit worth twice the first-year payroll tax for each new hire, amounting to several thousand dollars, depending on the new worker’s salary.The idea of a tax credit for companies that create new jobs, something the federal... more
-
-
"The recent arrest of a businessman accused of buying and selling kidneys in the United States, a scandal unearthed on July 23 as part of the New Jersey corruption investigation, has drawn attention once again to the ever-growing organ shortage in this country.
Over the years, the number of people waiting for an organ in the U.S. has soared upward, increasing from 31,000 people in 1993 to over 101,000 today, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing, or UNOS, the non-profit organization that keeps track of all the transplants in the U.S. As the shortage grows, the dilemma remains, how can the number of donations be brought up to meet the need? Some think this supply-and-demand problem could have a financial solution — provide incentives to donors.
Of course, selling organs in the U.S. is against the law. The National Organ Transplant Act, passed in 1984, states that human organs cannot be exchanged “for valuable consideration,” meaning something of monetary value. But for years, members of the transplant community have debated the idea of providing incentives to organ donors, such as tax credits or even direct payments. However, some fear that these types of incentives could lead to an unregulated market for organs and is not worth the risk. While implementation of incentives is likely far off, the issue has divided the transplant community, and no clear consensus exists.
Imagine if people were not just reimbursed, but actually paid for their kidneys. Some people think that a regulated system could be put in place in which true financial incentives — ones that result in financial gain — are provided to donors. This incentive could be a cash payment, or something less direct, like lifetime health insurance.
One of the biggest fears with introducing financial incentives is that it might lead to an organ market and create a situation in which the rich could exploit the poor for organs.
“Once you insert monetary gain into the equation of organ donation, now you have a market. Once you have a market, markets are not controllable, markets are not something you can regulate,” says Delmonico. “The problem with markets is that rich people would descend upon poor people to buy their organs, and the poor don’t have any choice about it.”
***
What do you think? Should living organ donors be paid? Would it create an unstable body part market?"The recent arrest of a businessman accused of buying and selling kidneys in the... more
-
-
Look Mom & Dad; I won you a brand new car!
For her strong school attendance record, Ashley Martinez won a sparkling new Dodge Caliber—a sporty hatchback that starts at about $15,000.
Unfortunately, she needs to wait four years to drive her prize. She's only 12.
"I can wait," the Eberhart Elementary School 7th grader said Monday.
Look Mom & Dad; I won you a brand new car!
For her strong school attendance... more
-
-
so sweet.
Share your ideas, this is a great incentive and solution for multiple issues.
Everybody loves paid time off.
-
way to go Mr.Chris King!!
PORTLAND- Chris King Precision Components is a company that has built its reputation on going above and beyond.
From the first headset he made back in 1976, Chris King has proven that he sets his own standards and then keeps pushing them higher. But what many people don’t know about this privately held company is that King’s high standards go far beyond his products.
Take for instance the company’s approach to encouraging bike commuting. Chris King Precision Components has what might be the most comprehensive and aggressive encouragement program in the country.
Here’s a breakdown of what the company provides to its employees:
* Secure, indoor parking for every employee as well as a dedicated entry way for bikes.
* Contemporary locker room facilities for men and women with private shower stalls and changing areas.
* Full size lockers for every employee. (These lockers were salvaged from an older building and reconfigured with a custom designed ventilation system. Air is constantly circulated and drawn from the lockers to keep clothes and towels dry and smelling fresh.)
* Loaner bicycles, locks and lights available for checkout by any employee.
* Route mapping advice and instruction from our commuting coordinator.
* One-on-one meetings with all new hires to discuss transportation options and commuting strategies.
This past May alone, 81 vacation days were earned as part of the special bike commuter challenge. But employees didn’t just help themselves, their choice to ride instead of drive resulted in (based on 11,468 miles ridden)
- - - click link for full inspiring article - - -so sweet.
Share your ideas, this is a great incentive and solution for multiple... more
-
-
This video gives much needed attention to Virginia's Film Industry.... and touches on the issues surrounding film making in Virginia. For more information, go to the Virginia Production Alliance's website: http://www.FilmVa.com
This video gives much needed attention to Virginia's Film Industry.... and... more
-
-
mibbbs
-
added this
-
4 years ago
- |
-
Links and information about film production resources, talent, local film commissions and much more in the Lone Star State...including info on new production incentives.Links and information about film production resources, talent, local film commissions... more
-
-
Employers are offering cash incentives for overweight workers, the idea is that it will save money in the long run in health care. Employers are offering cash incentives for overweight workers, the idea is that it... more
-
