Solazyme CEO Jonathan Wolfson argues that a cap-and-trade system will be ineffective in leading development away from high-carbon technologies. “If I was the one writing the rules, I would just tax carbon,” he says.
Solazyme describes itself as “a synthetic biology company that unleashes the power of marine microbes to create clean and scalable solutions for the renewable energy, industrial chemical, and specialty ingredient markets.”
One of these days, I will (as promised back when the Liberals were still promoting their failed “GreenShift” approach to the problem) explain in more detail why cap-and-trade is a specious corporate scam. But in the meantime, good on Mr. Wolfson for being so blunt in rejecting that approach to tackling the problem of carbon emissions and for being so forthright about the quid pro quo that should (but sadly doesn’t in most cases) exist when government backs research and development efforts that lead to profitable enterprises.
Oh, I almost forgot. The complete ForaTV piece is available here.
14 Comments
April 15, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Yes. A carbon tax. And while we are at it tax per mile driven.The stupidity of all the support for all the vehicles on this planet is now beyond absurd.
In BC the NDP are sending people to the Greens because of their and leader Carole James’ response to the Campbell government tax.
Still, it was stupid to give a $100 to every
person in BC. That could have bought a lot more public transit.
Yes, industry pollutes but if we could get people out of their daily auto drive anywhere and everywhere
we would have a saner more peaceful and healthier planet and people.
Is there any where to get away from the noise of the automobile?And dependance on it?
Tax this, tax that but does it really help with awareness and individual as well as corporate action. ?
In some sense, the corporations are getting more mindful than everyday citizens.Perhaps the threat of a carbon tax has worked for some companies.
Going more Green will create a better profile .
April 15, 2009 at 5:26 pm
I’m inclined to agree with you.
In theory, it’s all well and good to tax producers, but if there’s no competitive market then everything just winds up being automatically passed down the line and ultimately ends up in the lap of the end-user (who really has no say over matters from start to finish).
April 15, 2009 at 8:01 pm
We need new thinking.
I can’t fathom how government intervention will do anything but wreck a good idea, but there is the possibility that it will stimulate implementation of many new ideas.
On a related note, I am still bewildered how people see the end of the world in Al Gore’s Epistle, the World Wildlife Fund’s corporatism, and the sacred writings of the IPCC. We’ve got a new religion out there and the truth believers are more zealous than the followers of Jim Jones.
April 15, 2009 at 8:13 pm
We’ve had a whole day of teabagging, Tomm. Can you save the stoopid for another 24 hours?
April 15, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Sorry to wreck your evening. I assume you can teabag without me.
I noticed Ignatieff has elbowed his way in to talk about raising taxes. What was it Chief Dan George said in Little Big Man… “It’s a good day to die”?
Yes let’s have a recession. Let’s use it as an excuse to ratchet up government spending. Let’s use the wasteful government spending as a reason to cluck about incurring new debt. Then let’s wait for the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party to openly muse about raising taxes. I really like Ignatieff, but his brain isn’t always working at peak capacity. Sometimes his comments should make even a pretentious, arrogant old man like him, blush.
April 15, 2009 at 9:30 pm
We’ve got a new religion out there and the truth believers are more zealous than the followers of Jim Jones.
Thanks, Tomm, for adducing the all-too-often forgotten ethical commonality between suicidal, mass murdering cultists and people who wish to reduce GHG’s. You’ve made ol’ “character-assassinating” Sir Francis blush.
I assume you can teabag without me.
Believe me, Tomm, it takes two to teabag–unless you’re double jointed.
Yes let’s have a recession. Let’s use it as an excuse to ratchet up government spending.
Done, and done (cf. Flaherty’s latest budget).
Then let’s wait for the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party to openly muse about raising taxes.
Heh. The “anniversary” you’re palpitating over looms about as large in Canadians’ cultural memories as the anniversary of Sir John Thompson’s birthday. Who gives a shit?
And please don’t split your infinitives.
April 15, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Sir Francis,
“infinitive splitting”? I’m afraid you have me at a disadvantage. I’ll give you one for grammar, if you give me one for logic.
In regards to suicidal cultists, please share a cup with your green kool aid drinking friends, who will pretty much go to any length to ridicule, embarrass, or smear the “deniers”. Equating people who aren’t sure about the cause, effect, or implications of greenhouse gas emissions with White Supremists who “deny” the holocaust, is pretty much going brain cell to brain cell with Jim Jones’ body guards. You can’t “deny” that.
And, of course, you are correct about Sir John Thompson’s birthday. He sounds important, having been knighted and all, but I can’t seem to muster up any real emotions.
April 15, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Tomm — I’m not quite sure what’s gotten you so flustered about Ignatieff’s completely unremarkable observation that taxes might have to rise at some point in the future to pay for the orgy of “wasteful” government spending now being disbursed to prop up the economy in the face of a severe recession.
April 15, 2009 at 10:29 pm
I’m afraid you have me at a disadvantage.
And that’s news to whom?
…give me one for logic.
First, give me a reason.
Equating people who aren’t sure about the cause, effect, or implications of greenhouse gas emissions with White Supremists who “deny” the holocaust…
…not that anyone actually does that.
Anyways, you’ve clarified your analogy: environmentalists are Peoples’ Templesque not because they’re mass murderers, but because they’re not very smart. Splendid. Care to make the same analogy between the CPC and the NSDAP?
He sounds important…
He was one of our Conservative prime ministers, briefly. So, yes, he is important (to me, not to you).
April 15, 2009 at 10:35 pm
You are right. It’s not remarkable to speculate on raising taxes. Many governments have done lots of it. It is a little weird though. Why wouldn’t we raise money the old fashioned way, by increasing productivity and increasing efficiency of government services? It’s just a little weird he is jumping in to speculate about raising taxes.
Haven’t government’s found that the easiest way to raise money is to have high employment, and lots of good jobs? Isn’t that connected with tax rates that promote higher productivity?
It’s what we are hoping will be the result of the end of this recession. 60B could be paid off within 3-5 years if the economy heats up again. All this without raising taxes.
I notice that Ignatieff is now back pedaling like a mad fiend, realizing his words were actually being written down. He is also saying that he was being speculative and the context was mis-interpreted. I’m glad to hear that.
April 15, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Sir Francis,
I’m mortified that I didn’t catch that the Sir John Thompson you were throwing on the table was THE Sir John Sparrow David Thompson, Prime Minister of Canada from 1892-1894. I thought you meant Sir John Eric Sidney Thompson, the Mayan Scholar. My mistake.
In regards to people calling Stephen Harper a “denier”, you need go no further than the Honorable Stephane Dion, Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada at a press conference during the last election campaign.
Did you just compare the Conservative Party of Canada to the National Socialist Party of pre-war Germany? I am assuming you are saying this in jest…It’s not particularly funny. In fact it is a little disturbing.
Is your point that my analogy is at the same level of faux humor? I think you are missing the “zealot” aspect of my point. Many green followers do not see anything wrong with their heightened and very public levels of ridicule. They see it as fair and right. Just like a Muslem zealot looking upon a Jew as some form of bug.
April 15, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Tomm — I can’t presume to imagine what Ignatieff may have been thinking when he made those remarks and I’m disinclined to make suppositions on his behalf.
You and I (and everyone else on planet Earth, for that matter) likely share the wish that government would deliver its essential services in a way that was more seamless, effective and cost-efficient without having to burden rate payers with ever-more taxes. But alas, life doesn’t generally tend to work that way.
As for increasing “productivity” this too is another pie-in-the-sky metric for the most part. It’s not like a thermostat that one simply cranks up or down.
Yes, “high employment, and lots of good jobs” is definitely a recipe for economic success! I simply cannot imagine why no one thought of that before! These two things, I believe, comprise the crucial fulcrum of Keynesian thinking.
Unfortunately, we’ve seen a steady erosion in the “good jobs” element of that equation over the last 30 years or so as everyone madly raced to the lowest common denominator of the almighty bottom line. Which kind of loops back into the “productivity” paradox alluded to previously.
April 15, 2009 at 11:25 pm
I thought you meant Sir John Eric Sidney Thompson, the Mayan Scholar.
Heh. Which is why he sounded vaguely “important” to you.
My mistake.
More news.
Is your point that my analogy is at the same level of faux humor?
Bingo.
I think you are missing the “zealot” aspect of my point.
No, I got that. It’s just irrelevant.
And I’ve just disposed of your comment over at my place. I think it’s pretty clear what you’ve been doing with your time away from the blogs: replenishing your supply of gall…
April 16, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Tomm, you’re not allowed to bitch about high taxes and high government debt at the same time. Pick one you think Iggy is for.
If the recent coral evidence of catastrophic sea level rise is true (I’m not yet convinced without a 2nd data point), I think the Government of Canada should begin right now making preparations to use the new military bases up north as staging grounds to transform a few of our uninhabited Arctic Archipalego islands as emergengy climate refugee camps. Probably this would mean subsidized freshwater production R+D of some sort (tugboating Greenland icebergs might work for a while) and maybe fishfarming for food.
If sea levels rise feet in 50 years, there will be billions of climate refugees. We should be able to house at least 100 000 000, albeit like cattle.