A good discussion in this link shows the proposals and how they work.
This is a quote to the portion that makes my point:
Quote:
|
But the problem here is the instantaneous cost that firms have to shell out in order to continue doing business in the year after the cap is established. Estimated costs for U.S. utilities alone—not counting greenhouse gas emitters in manufacturing or other sectors—are in the range of $40 billion per year using current permit prices as they are being traded in the European market. Not only will businesses scream bloody murder, the public will also, since most of that cost will immediately hit consumers’ wallets as the prices of energy, goods, and services rise and keep rising every year as the cap tightens. Not only will costs of everything increase, but the impact will be highly regressive, landing harder on the poorest of the population, who spend a greater percentage of their household income on energy than do the wealthier. Finally, there is the politically unacceptable transfer of wealth from coal states to natural-gas states such as California, where incomes are considerably higher.
|
http://www.american.com/archive/2009...tep-is-a-doozy