Political will: Congress does not have the political will to make strong enough short-term cuts in emissions, ACES is cutting emissions by only 17% by 2020. Hansen assumes that shifting from cap-and-trade to a carbon tax will instantly give congress the political will to adopt stronger policies, but it obviously will not. If a carbon tax could be passed, it would be as weak as the cap and trade, and it would have the same complexities to accommodate regional interests.

Political feasibility: If cap and trade is killed, it will be years before a new carbon tax bill is put together. That means the world will not be able to negotiate a treaty in Copenhagen in December, and there will be a long delay before the world begins to reduce emissions. We cannot afford that delay, since scientists agree that emissions must peak by 2015 to keep temperature increases below 2 degrees C.

I admire your work on the carbon tax, but I think it is time to face reality and admit that cap and trade is the only game in town - the only way to start reducing emissions in the near to mid-term future.

his arguments need debunking because he is mostly recycling myths that others are pushing — and with the country’s top climate scientist putting his name on this collection of false and misleading statements, they will no doubt be parroted by yet more people. Hansen has just written, “G-8 Failure Reflects U.S. Failure on Climate Change” for The Huffington Post.

Let me go straight to his needlessly (and pointlessly) provocative attacks on the “counterfeit climate bill known as Waxman-Markey,” which is filled with right-wing and left-wing myths — and very little understanding of the basics of either this bill or cap-and-trade systems.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/09/nasas-james-hansen-pushes-false-misleading-and-pointless-attack-on-u-s-climate-action/