THE ENVIRONMENT

CAP AND TRADE: A DYNAMIC WAY TO CUT BACK CO2

Many administrations have attempted to cut back on American carbon emissions. But too many have focused on inefficient and limited government regulation.

I believe that we should install a cap-and-trade system to gradually decrease the carbon emissions of U.S. companies. The cap-and-trade system is backed by the Environmental Defense Fund, science, and innovation, but does not get nearly the support it deserves. The “cap” part of the system is a limit that the government would place on industry’s CO2 emissions. The cap would be split into allowances, each permitting one ton of emissions, and distributed to companies.

The reason this is so effective is because of the second part of the system—“trade.” Companies emitting less carbon could sell their extra allowances to other companies, creating a strong incentive for companies to innovate and emit less carbon. As a result, we harness the true power of the American economy—innovation and entrepreneurship—to decrease carbon emissions and slow global warming. Plus, we ensure that American businesses stay at the forefront of technology development.

Cap-and-trade has been extremely successful; it was implemented nationwide in the ‘90s to decrease sulfur dioxide emissions (which cause acid rain). The system, which the Environmental Defense Fund now deems our “best shot” at curbing the emissions that lead to global warming, “slashed levels of sulfur dioxide at a fraction of the projected cost.”

PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT

Global warming is a global issue. I believe we should rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement, not only to show our commitment to curbing the effects of global warming but also to hold other nations accountable to their promises. No matter how effective our domestic environmental policies are, we share our air with everyone else. To have any significant long-term effect, we need to work together.