RUSH: Mark in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Hello, sir. Nice to have you on the EIB Network.
RUSH: Hi, Rush. It’s a real pleasure.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: Thank you. I just wanted to call to kind of clarify some misconceptions that you and a previous caller seemed to have about emissions offsets and cap-and-trade programs. The idea of the cap-and-trade program is that the governing body — I guess for Kyoto, that would be the UN — allocates to facilities a certain number of allowances and credits that they’re allowed to emit.
RUSH: Wait, wait. The UN. The UN allocates to facilities a certain number of allowances and credits they’re allowed to emit?
CALLER: That’s correct.
RUSH: The UN?
CALLER: Well, it depends on the program. Say Houston is in nonattainment under EPA for nox (or nitrogen oxides), so the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, they allocate emissions for those, for nox, nitrogen oxides.
RUSH: So the UN does this? The UN tells Texas what its nitrogen oxide levels can be?
CALLER: No, no, no. I’m just saying that for under Kyoto, for carbon, for the countries that have subscribed to Kyoto protocol, I’m supposing that the UN would allocate those allowances.
RUSH: Oh, oh.
CALLER: And then once they’re allocated —
RUSH: But Kyoto is bogus.
CALLER: I understand that. I agree with you. I’m not disputing that at all. But the mechanisms that they’re allocated, and then the facilities can sell those on an open market to each other.
RUSH: Right.
CALLER: So the idea is that one facility that reduces emissions by being more efficient or shutting something down would be able to sell a certain amount of those credits usually measured in tons to another facility. I know under Kyoto, some pollutants — some greenhouse gases, quote, unquote — are considered more polluting than others or more greenhouse effected than others, and so a facility that produces some of those chemicals actually has, for one ton the ratio might be 50 to one or a hundred to one, depending on the chemical.
RUSH: Right.
CALLER: So in particular India is really doing good on this because they produce some of those high polluting or high greenhouse gas factor chemicals, and so they?re really kind of cashing in on that. But I believe that the company in California is basically just buying those credits from facilities in countries that subscribe to the treaty —
RUSH: And planting trees —
CALLER: — and passing the costs on to you for taking them off the market.
RUSH: Right. It’s for suckers.
CALLER: It is. I mean, it does take the emissions credits off the market, but —
RUSH: You sound like you support this stuff. This is for suckers.
CALLER: No, no. It’s good for business, but I don’t support it at all. It’s a crock.
RUSH: How’s it good for business? It keeps regulators off their rear ends?
CALLER: I’m an environmental consultant, Rush. So overall it produces business for us.
RUSH: Let me ask you a question, if you’re an environment consultant. I just learned about this. Have you ever heard of anaerobic digestion?
CALLER: Sure.
RUSH: What is it?
CALLER: An aerobic digestion is respiration without oxygen. It’s the way yeast produces alcohol.
RUSH: It’s a way to take methane out. It basically helps cows expel gas without methane, right?
CALLER: I don’t know the details on that method, if they’re putting something in the feed to —
RUSH: Yes.
CALLER: — digest the methane, okay.
RUSH: Exactly right. Exactly right. They put something in the feed that digest the methane and they chew it in the cud rather than expel it out the tailpipe.
CALLER: Right. Okay. You know, that’s an innovative approach, but the global warming —
RUSH: This sounds state-of-the-art to me. This is a fart blocker. We have carbon offsets. Fart blockers. We’ve got an anaerobic digestion. We have your thing with India and the UN. I’ll tell you what. I’m going to drive with even less guilt than I have ever had when I leave today, folks, to go play golf where there is no manure on the golf course.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Listen to me, folks. These carbon credits, these offsets, are nothing more than the precursor to an imposed tax on energy usage, maybe an international tax. You are being set up. I will explain this in greater detail tomorrow on Open Line Friday. I’m looking forward to it. See you then.