Does anyone here have any economic training? I would like to explain this from an economic standpoint but I only have a minor in economics and am a little rusty. If anyone knows better feel free to correct me.
Basically anyone who belives in economics should believe in Kyoto. That is if you believe in standard principles such as supply and demand you should pretty much see Kyoto as the best solution to the ommisions problems. Right now as it stands the costs associated with airborne emmisions are largely borne not by the companies that produce pollution but by society. They gain the benefit of being able to pollute which costs society in the form of a reduced well being. Kyoto isn't a beurocratic attempt to lower emiisions but rather an attempt to put emissions into a free market system. In the creation of the pollution credit system a certain ammount of pollution will be tolerated. Then supply and demand should set an equilibrium price for these credits. A company will then make a cost-benefit analysis to determine whether it is cheaper to buy credits or reduce emmisions.
This is not exactly how Kyoto works but it is a simplified explanation of ideology behind it. As it stands now corporations are pretty much getting a free ride. They are using a resource(the environment), and not paying close to the benefit they recive from that resource. They are free riders.
While I don't claim Kyoto is perfect I would like to add that it was very difficult to achieve and we can be a long way off from any alternative plan. I also think the ideology is pretty sound. Sorry the explantion isn't any better, but this was from a 300 level economics course and I haven't looked at it in a while.
|