O.K., I have now said something nice about Goldman Sachs. And, there is actually some truth in this title.
Some people have pointed out that Goldman Sachs is one of the main forces lobbying for the cap-and-trade system of carbon permits that lies at the heart of the House-approved bill to combat climate change. Under this proposal, a certain amount of carbon permits would be issued each year. These permits would allow oil companies, utilities, and other manufacturers to emit a set amount of carbon dioxide each year.
The total amount of carbon dioxide emitted in the country would be restricted by the amount of permits issued. Some amount of permits would be grandfathered – handed out to coal burning utilities and other major emitters. The rest would be auctioned off to the highest bidder, raising revenue for the government. Both the auctioned and the grandfathered permits could be resold in the secondary market. This gives an incentive for large emitters to reduce their emissions, since they can then profit from selling their permits to others.
Many environmentalists have objected to the permit system, arguing that a direct tax on carbon emissions would be easier and cheaper to administer. This is probably true. They have also pointed out that Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street firms have been major proponents of the cap-and-trade system. They argue that these firms stand to make billions off the permits.
This is absolutely true, but the story is actually not as devious as some seem to believe. While there can be bubbles in carbon permits, just like there can be bubbles in wheat, corn, Internet stocks, or anything else traded in markets, there is no reason to believe that carbon permits are especially susceptible to bubbles, or that this has anything to do with Goldman’s interest in the system.
The reason for the interest is much simpler. The outstanding value of carbon permits will almost certainly run into the trillions of dollars once the system is fully up and running. The annual trading in these permits and various derivative instruments (e.g., options, futures, swaps of various types) is likely to also run into the trillions of dollars, perhaps tens of trillions.
A market that trades $10 trillion a year would generate $25 billion a year in revenue, if fees and commissions average 0.25 percent. If Goldman can capture 30 percent of these trades by getting in on the ground floor, then it stands to generate more than $8 billion each year in revenue from carbon trading. This is enough to explain Goldman’s enthusiasm for cap and trade – it’s all about as clear as it can possibly be.
How should the rest of us feel about giving Goldman $8 billion a year, and the financial industry as a whole $25 billion, to needlessly shuffle paper when we could have accomplished the exact same outcome with a simple carbon tax? We should be disgusted, but we should also recognize reality.
Matched against the combined power of the oil, gas, coal and auto industry, the enviros don’t stand a prayer. Members of Congress and presidents don’t worry that they won’t get re-elected because the environmental groups are unhappy with them. They do worry that they won’t get re-elected because the big industry lobbies are unhappy with them.
In this case, Goldman and the Wall Street boys are providing an essential countervailing force to the global warmers. And, fortunately for us, they are willing to accept their payoff as a contingency fee. If they don’t win a cap-and-trade system, then they go home empty-handed.
So, the basic story is in fact disgusting. We will have to needlessly shell out tens of billions each year – money that could go to productive purposes – to Wall Street banker types. This is the money that we must pay to buy their support and lobbying power. But the alternative is watching the global warmers defeat efforts to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. Maybe in ten or twenty years the balance of power will have changed enough that we don’t need to make payoffs to Goldman, but at that point the question will be moot. So, hand over your money to bankers and remember to thank them for saving the planet.
Not everyone can pay for the news. But if you can, we need your support.
Truthout is widely read among people with lower incomes and among young people who are mired in debt. Our site is read at public libraries, among people without internet access of their own. People print out our articles and send them to family members in prison — we receive letters from behind bars regularly thanking us for our coverage. Our stories are emailed and shared around communities, sparking grassroots mobilization.
We’re committed to keeping all Truthout articles free and available to the public. But in order to do that, we need those who can afford to contribute to our work to do so — especially now, because we have just 2 days left to raise $33,000 in critical funds.
We’ll never require you to give, but we can ask you from the bottom of our hearts: Will you donate what you can, so we can continue providing journalism in the service of justice and truth?