Carbon Fees and Dividend on TNT Tonight

September 24, 2015 in Uncategorized | by Eric Kirk

Thursday Night Talk on KHSU tonight – I’ll be discussing anti-climate change policies in the form of carbon fee and dividend with John Schaefer of the Citizens Climate Lobby at 7:00 tonight.

September 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30

49 comments

Comments feed for this article

September 24, 2015 at 10:19 pm

Anonymous

I caught a portion of the show en route. Sounded like bla bla bla until a caller reminded everybody that the whole carbon tax yada yada is more of the same: consumerism bullshit to serve the same people who are fucking up the planet in the first place. I didn’t catch hosts responses. The same governments that whip up literally trillions of dollars to bail out failed corporations and keep the every day joe in debt are passing more bucks on to the people that feed their power. There’s nothing capitalist or free market about the united states. If there were, first bank etc would be out of business and their CEO’s in prison. Caught a little bit of your hosts talking about europe’s model of public transportation, busses in the middle east, the need for such infrastructure…it’s all in line with more and more business as usual and more people having less freedom than they do right now. The governments are encouraging a growing population of poor to serve a shrinking population of elite. Address no real problems, present no real solutions, keep the conversation very limited across the board.

September 24, 2015 at 10:50 pm

Eric Kirk

Well John is someone actively involved in an effort to try to bring some sanity into the situation. I expect that you are too anonymous, and naturally I expect your next post to lay out the solutions. Because certainly you wouldn’t just snipe at everyone else’s efforts from your ivory tower.

September 24, 2015 at 11:05 pm

Anonymous

” lay out the solutions.”

Not my job.

September 25, 2015 at 7:55 am

Eric Kirk

Naturally not.

September 25, 2015 at 11:28 am

Anonymous

I don’t want to live in europe or the middle east. Do you? When comparing how efficient foreign public transportation is, etc, remember that to be poor in europe and the middle east is not fun. You and hosts talked about the european model and passing hte buck onto the every day person like it’s just another “oh well”. Practically verbatim. I don’t know the extent to which you include how shitty that is in your vision. I don’t have a golden solution (other than what you’d probably [definitely] consider unrealistic) but I know that I don’t want to live in europe or the middle east. I’d rather hitch hike in the US. The population is growing exponentially, as your caller pointed out, as is redundant infrastructure, industry, deforestation and all that pollutive fun stuff. A lobbyist proposing to simply make big polluters pay more to be “allowed” to pollute more isn’t along my idea of a solution, sorry. I bet john’s a really nice guy though, wank wank irrelevant.

September 25, 2015 at 11:34 am

Eric Kirk

If I was poor, I would much rather live in Europe than the US, as Europe has a much more extensive support system to mitigate poverty. As I’m not poor (and medically somewhat covered, at least for now), I prefer to live in the US. Actually, I could easily live in Europe. I would miss the Chinese food. The Middle East not so much, but then I’m not a religious person.

As for the proposal, it’s about more than making polluters pay more. Polluters operate on maximization of profit. For-profit businesses look for ways to reduce costs. If the technology is available and cost-efficient, they will employ it. The fee system provides incentive.

Is it a panacea? No, but it may be an integral part of comprehensive solutions.

Apparently, it’s worked very well in British Columbia.

September 25, 2015 at 11:47 am

Anonymous

You don’t know what you’re talking about. Talk to poor people from Europe, s’all I gotta say about that.

Passing the cost of corporate pay-to-pollute onto you and me, when it amounts to no real change in our daily lives, is bad, period. How and why you’d argue against that is weird. Again, our government whipped up trillions of dollars to keep you and me in debt to corporations that would now be out of business if we operated in a real free market system. The people have very very very very little governing power in this country. The government doesn’;t want a solution, they already have their own answers, take a look outside. The argument has been going on longer than we’ve been alive. Increasing our cost of living for more of the same isn’t the solution.

September 25, 2015 at 12:26 pm

Eric Kirk

On the first paragraph, I have working class relatives in Denmark and Germany who think it’s insane that even people with health insurance coverage can go bankrupt in the US, that we pay for college, and that we don’t have mandatory 6 or 8 weeks of paid vacation.

As to the passing of cost, it’s not that simple. Yes, some prices will go up if the demand curve is elastic – that the market can bear it. But it’s not automatic. When we voted in the 25 cent increase in cigarette taxes back in the early 90s the prices increased only like 15 cents, meaning that the company had to absorb 10 cents for each pack.

Government isn’t an entity in the way in which you describe. It’s a process. It is subject to a number of influences. John’s group is one among many. But it’s an important proposal, and an important voice.

September 25, 2015 at 3:19 pm

Erasmus

It’s insane that we spent trillions of dollars defending Europe and the rest of the semi-free world for several decades after WW2. The money spent on missiles, solders, battleships, military research, nuclear weapons, the CIA. the proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam, could have provided everyone in this country with a goldplated healthcare plan. Whether we chose correctly will be decided by those historians in the next century, for it seems that there is an arc of history, a right side of history, a definitive verdict on the past that posterity will provide. — I don’t wish to offer an opinion at this moment. I will say, though, that Europaphilia strikes me as unwarranted when a longer view of history is adopted, and that the continent that gave the world fascism and communism and that is now committing a slow-motion suicide (with it s low birthrate and increasing Islamization) is not a model we ought to follow.

September 25, 2015 at 3:59 pm

Henchman Of Justice

Anonymous kicks your ass EK.

Volkswagon is an example of subsidizing corporate greed while baiting and switching reality on consumers.

Carbon taxes is a front, a sorta out the back door scapegoat to justify the hipocrisy.

America is shit right now and nothing the pope is gonna change.

JLM5D

September 25, 2015 at 6:56 pm

Anonymous

Eric, we’re in an epic, game changing crisis of a drought here in california. As a result, golf courses are watering their lawns more. Big box emporiums are pressure washing their parking lots more. Car dealerships are washing their cars more. I’m looking at my water bill right now, just came in the mail. I’m using about 33% less water right now than this time last year, but paying 40% more. I use less electricity than ever, but pay more than ever. I live in a space half the size I did 15 years ago and pay the same amount. I commute a fraction of the distance I used to but pay over twice as much. Do you get it? You and your wise old peers make enough money to not give a fuck about being nickled and dimed to death because nickles and dimes don’t mean shit to you. I have to work more hours every year to keep up. You’re way out of touch, sorry.

September 25, 2015 at 8:13 pm

Anonymous

“When we voted in the 25 cent increase in cigarette taxes back in the early 90s the prices increased only like 15 cents, meaning that the company had to absorb 10 cents for each pack.”

Wrong. The tobacco industry recieved all kinds of breaks, comps and subsidies that more than compensated for their “loss”. Lowly employees within the industry, however, suffered stagnant pay along with everybody else’s increased cost of living. And a pack of cigs is now more than double what it was in the 90’s, yet the industry profits in the billions.

Sticking it to the people is not the way to go, eric.

September 25, 2015 at 11:47 pm

Another Blue Anonymous

Probably the most stupid argument against a proposal is that we don’t do it because it isn’t enough. That is the argument being advanced here.

Great show Eric!

September 26, 2015 at 1:25 am

Henchman Of Justice

Another Blue Anonymous,

Or your phrase could more accurately state, “Probably the most stupid argument against a proposal is that we don’t do it because it is enough. Overpopulation, needs to be controlled and decreased.”

JLM5D

September 26, 2015 at 4:24 am

Just Watchin

Blue Anon….please post your sources backing up the statements on golf course watering, parking lot pressure washing, and car dealers washing cars. These evil people need to be stopped!

September 26, 2015 at 12:53 pm

Anonymous

“Overpopulation, needs to be controlled and decreased.”

Yep! An understatement, if anything. If actively banking on the status quo, as resident readers of this blog perpetuate…and if that issue is as properly connected to all the problems of natural resource management…then the issue of population is so dramatically understated it really genuinely is insane.

September 26, 2015 at 1:04 pm

Anonymous

Just Watchin, I ain’t even lyin’. Talk to industry insiders. I don’t really do the internet anymore. Talking to people face to face who are involved in the processes is much more informative.

September 26, 2015 at 1:17 pm

Anonymous

Just Watchin: talk to people face to face, who work at car dealerships, big boxes and golf courses. That’s what I do. Yes, they need to be stopped, to say the least!

September 26, 2015 at 5:59 pm

Just say'n

This “Cap & Trade” is nothing new. The idea was the reason Redwood Forest Foundation Inc was pitched and sold to Bank of America in 2007. President Obama proposed a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions during his 2008 presidential campaign. A similar cap-and-trade system was included in the 1990 Clean Air Act, which is viewed by many as being instrumental in reducing sulfur-related acid rain. Opponents of cap-and-trade systems come from both sides of the environmental debate: environmental activists argue it doesn’t do enough, while business advocates argue that its impact on companies’ profits is too great.

In theory, the system does have some potentially good points, by rewarding facilities that control air pollution and providing a means for those who cannot afford the latest air pollution technologies (or who have not completed upgrades) to buy some maneuvering room.

A big problem with cap-and-trade systems is that they allow for certain parts of the country to become much more polluted than they should be. Overall air standards in the nation might be met, but people in some parts of the country get horrible air quality as a result, and this isn’t fair…or healthy. Again, this is a problem caused when cap-and-trade systems are left too open-ended, which is generally the case.

Cap-and-trade regulatory models have been effective in decreasing emissions of certain pollutants, due to their typical dispersal patterns or lower toxicity. But for mercury, it’s a different story. Because mercury emissions tend to concentrate nearer their source than do some other air pollutants, a cap-and-trade program may result in harm to children in certain communities where high mercury emissions would be allowed to continue or to expand. And with mercury, the risk isn’t just the air pollution; it’s the fact that the highly toxic metal settles from the air into the waterways, and ends up in the tissues of fish that we consume.

The cap-and-trade programs that have been proposed by the EPA may not address existing “hot spots” of mercury pollution and contamination, and may create new local hot spots for mercury, disproportionately impacting local communities, especially those depending on subsistence fishing.

September 26, 2015 at 8:35 pm

Eric Kirk

Cap and Trade is a different animal. There are some similarities in that the fee and dividend policies sometimes allow industries to sell emission rights, but it’s a different kind of thing. The problem with cap and trade, according to John, is that the caps have been too high. Markets work with scarcity, but if the caps are so high that there is no scarcity then there’s nothing really to barter, and no incentive to reduce emissions.

September 27, 2015 at 7:10 am

Bystander

“The same governments that whip up literally trillions of dollars to bail out failed corporations and keep the every day joe in debt are passing more bucks on to the people that feed their power.” -anonymous

Absolutely true. Well said, in all your posts. It’s good to see others testifying what they’ve witnessed & know is true.

September 27, 2015 at 8:11 am

Bystander

Speaking of tobacco tMSA payments that the consumer pays in “sin taxes” instead of the big companies, one of the back room deals made by BT, BP & politicians, was “to protect the cigarette companies”. The FDA was given authority to ban all non-equivalent tobacco products. Non-equivalent? That’s right, non-equivalent in harm. Any less harmful product is outta here, slandered, taxed, banned…

September 27, 2015 at 9:13 am

Just say'n

Forgive me, “different animal”? As you admit “There are some similarities”. Cap-and-trade programs and carbon taxes can work well as long as they are designed to provide a strong economic signal to switch to cleaner energy. If both approaches are well-designed, the two options are quite similar and could even be used in tandem.

Cap-and-trade has one key environmental advantage over a carbon tax: It provides more certainty about the amount of emissions reductions that will result and little certainty about the price of emissions (which is set by the emissions trading market). A carbon tax provides certainty about the price but little certainty about the amount of emissions reductions.

A carbon tax also has one key advantage: It is easier and quicker for governments to implement. A carbon tax can be very simple. It can rely on existing administrative structures for taxing fuels and can therefore be implemented in just a few months. In theory, the same applies to cap-and-trade systems, but in practice they tend to be much more complex. More time is required to develop the necessary regulations, and they are more susceptible to lobbying and loopholes. Cap-and-trade also requires the establishment of an emissions trading market.

September 27, 2015 at 9:18 am

Eric Kirk

Wrong. The tobacco industry recieved all kinds of breaks, comps and subsidies that more than compensated for their “loss”.

That’s a false statement. They received nothing to compensate for the loss of profits in the passage of the California taxes.

And even if they had, you missed the point. The point is that even with cigarettes, there is always some elasticity to the supply/demand curves. You really should learn some basic economics.

September 27, 2015 at 10:43 am

Mitch

The political downside of almost any plan that increases the cost of fossil fuels is that it impacts rural areas more than urban areas — that gives you a guaranteed minimum number of Senators who will block the plan. You then need to start handing out goodies to them, which creates a quagmire.

Having said that, a revenue-neutral carbon-based transfer fee is a no-brainer from the point of view of desirable outcomes. You make the bad thing more expensive, it triggers innovations to reduce the amount of bad thing you use. You could burn the money raised and you’d still come out ahead. If you can guarantee that the price increase will stick around for ten years and increase every year, even better.

Using it to fund a guaranteed minimum income is as good a use of the funds as any other, and it makes moral sense, but it raises a red flag in the faces of the “I walked ten miles each way to school and now they’re giving people free money and a smartphone just for breathing” people.

I’d almost prefer to see it dedicated to reducing the national debt, but that puts the red flag in the face of the “I ain’t paying the gubmint no damn tax” people. (I don’t have a clue any longer about what the national debt really means, but I know lots of people are a’gin it, and it’s a number that has lots of zeros, so the faithful know it’s “big.”)

You’re always going to be raising a red flag in front of some group of people, and you’re more or less guaranteed that there will be well-funded swift-boating of anything that makes energy company executives unhappy. I don’t know what approach would encounter the least resistance.

September 27, 2015 at 6:54 pm

Henchman Of Justice

Time to start charging illegal immigrants a carbon tax for being undocumented and polluting our country even more. So far, 500,000 illegals with a potential to total 1.4 million who have received a drivers license.

Classic liberal pickle headed politics playing frauds r us.

Fuck illegals!

JLM5D

September 28, 2015 at 6:49 am

Anonymous

“You really should learn some basic economics.”

YOU really should learn some basic economics.

The government whipped up trillions of dollars to bail out failed corporations and keep the everyday joe in debt to them. I’m using about 33% less water right now than this time last year, but paying 40% more. I use less electricity than ever, but pay more than ever. I live in a space half the size I did 15 years ago and pay the same amount. I commute a fraction of the distance I used to but pay over twice as much. Do you get it? When the nickles and dimes add up to an amount that starts to dent your new car payments, that’s when people like you begin to rethink your own convictions, but until then us lowly servants get the shaft and your “oh well’s”.

September 28, 2015 at 8:19 am

Henchman Of Justice

Solar under attack by California utility companies.

The twist – to charge fees back to solar owners who are connected to the grid that eliminate any savings the solar installed system provides.

A $3 per system kilowatt capacity. If a 6 kilowatt system, a monthly $18 charge.

Also, a proposal to cut in half the payment or offset credit to the solar customer who sells back to utilities.

Once again, overpopulation and industrialization create uber greed in the fewest pockets for a centralized, outdated, fossel fuel driven industry.

JLM5D

September 28, 2015 at 10:45 am

Eric Kirk

YOU really should learn some basic economics.

I just really don’t have the time and energy to explain elasticity of the demand curve to you. It’s really something which should be taught in high school. It is in Europe. Sorry.

September 28, 2015 at 11:49 am

Anonymous

“elasticity of the demand curve”

You mean a bunch of uncontextual rhetoric that only exists in the collective imagination of you and your peers. I think the differences between our common material realm and the realm of our individual thoughts should be considered more….ON YOUR INTERNETS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

September 28, 2015 at 12:07 pm

Anonymous

Of course anyone who actually wanted to learn could look it up, same as the science behind contrails. But the aggressively ignorant are experts at not learning.

September 28, 2015 at 1:39 pm

Eric Kirk

Agreed. I do, somewhat, fault the educational system, but the educational system itself is hampered by prevalent anti-learning culture. It’s why A.M. talk radio is so popular – encourages the expression of huge opinions based upon very little knowledge or information. It’s fine, but try to have a discussion with depth and it can get problematic when you have to explain the very basics.

September 28, 2015 at 4:24 pm

Anonymous

Today, class, eric kirk is going to teach you that when your cost of living goes up disproportionate to your income, that’s actually your fault.

September 28, 2015 at 4:25 pm

Henchman Of Justice

A successful education system is a combination between the student and the teacher and the administration and the politicians. All those parties plus the parents and probably more entities all have to be on the same page. Especially important are the students who have to be motivated to actually want to learn.

Maybe, just maybe, too much television, technology and turmoil at home hinders the desire for young people to want to learn. Just some thoughts on the potential detriments of the 21st Century adolescents failures to learn.

JLM5D

September 28, 2015 at 4:38 pm

Anonymous

“Just some thoughts on the potential detriments of the 21st Century adolescents failures to learn.”

That and they’re all walking around with portable TV’s that they stare at all the time. And they got those TV’s from their parents who also stare at their own portable TV’s all day.

September 29, 2015 at 11:11 am

Unk John

“Today, class, eric kirk is going to teach you that when your cost of living goes up disproportionate to your income, that’s actually your fault.”

I’m really struggling to understand what can make you say/believe that Eric said that. He understands the unfairness of what you describe. He also understands how they get away with it. What he is pointing out is something that if EVERYONE learns, would give you more of a chance to deal with it.

September 29, 2015 at 11:45 am

Anonymous

Increasing your cost of living isn’t going to fix anything at all. But that’s beside the point that even humoring the idea is ridiculous. Our cost of living keeps going up disproportionate to our income. That’s all you need to know. The greatest gift the universe could give mankind is damaged. That’s another bit of important information. Squeezing more nickles and dimes out of me hasn’t helped anything.

September 29, 2015 at 12:33 pm

Henchman Of Justice

If EVERYONE learns it would give em more a chance to deal with it.

Hmmm, “deal with it” as opposed to should not have to deal with it at all………..

BUT,

WHEN cronies and shills (government whores and private sector frauds) only gain more power and control, dealing with it is an insult, an offense to the biological senses on the notion that victims are responsible for the problems the perps create.

JLM5D

September 29, 2015 at 7:34 pm

Unk John

Sorry I mentioned it.

September 30, 2015 at 5:57 am

Mitch

There are reasons, obvious upon a bit of reflection, why very lightly moderated blogs hosting anonymous commenters become what they become. I suppose one trick to participating in them is recognizing that what occurs on them is not typical of larger human society.

September 30, 2015 at 8:59 am

Anonymous

mitch, if blog insanity is typical…and it is…then maybe it’s long past time you and eric got those rusty gears cranking around the idea that the business-as-usual politics you solidify on blogs is what’s actually insane. People have no problem wrappign their head around daily life. Cash register monkeys at kmart have it figured out same as you. You and eric answer to so much frustration by saying that “the people” are doing it wrong, but “the people” are ultimately just going to work and eating what’s on the table. “The people” shouldn’t have to literally work more for less, as is still the case of daily life. It takes a certain kind of person to want to be a career politician in the first place. It takes another kind of person to have no problem soliciting money from the masses with promises of prosperity. And, I’m sure you’ve met plenty, there are shady motherfuckers who kiss babies and have no problem ripping people off. After over a century of this, guess what’s happened? “The system” is rigged, top down. Think outside YOUR box for a change!

September 30, 2015 at 10:11 am

Eric Kirk

Actually, around here the conspiracy theories are very much “business as usual.” It’s an industry.

September 30, 2015 at 11:26 am

Anonymous

Eric, it’s a very big industry alright! Think about it, literally every day somebody’s making a video they hope “goes viral”. Looking up anything to do with chemtrails on the internet guarantees a trip down the rabbit hole. I fell into the peripheral trap of the flat earth circus. The efforts behind so many sleek video presentations explaining how ridiculous it is to believe the earth is a sphere…I can’t take anything as genuine on the internet. Even the chemtrail dialog is baffling. “The science” behind the nature of chemtrails is unfolding, and now nanoparticles derivative of coal ash are what the internet consensus explains, with much more detail than the same dialog offered a few years ago. It was all about aluminum and barium (sp?) and pretty basic stuff compared to the in-depth explanations being offered today. Lots of people will regurgitate what they hear from a small number of people speaking from empirical learning.

But that’s irrelevant because that’s still the internet where you can learn for yourself that the earth is flat. Regarding “chemtrails” in the real world, however, people can’t just regurgitate away what everybody can see.

A planet’s worth of observational witnesses, including myself, are saying the same thing about what’s happening in the sky right now. Wrap your own “worst case scenario” science around how an operation like “chemtrails” would have to unfold if it was intended to be “secret”. The word “secret” is in quotes as sarcasm, because “chemtrails” are seen by everybody. Dissolve some of your linear thinking the same way you do with regards to “the economy” and “the elasticitiy of supply and demand”. You grant those terms corporate personhood but chemtrails are an abstract tin foil circus to you. In less than ten years, the amount of “chemtrails” has skyrocketed all over the world. It’s like how “the government” and all their “scientists” denied global warming until it became impossible for them to lie about what everybody was experiencing. And even that was less than twenty years ago! Within the last few years, almost weekly cloudcover formed of airplane exhaust has manifest over the tri-city area of humboldt county. Prior to about five years ago, it practically never happened. Only planes offshore now and then, not even monthly, and virtually no suspended contrails ever visible at all. It was an especially noticeable event when they started appearing, to those of us who had already been paying attention.

September 30, 2015 at 3:33 pm

Anonymous

Within the last few years, almost weekly cloudcover formed of airplane exhaust has manifest over the tri-city area of humboldt county. Prior to about five years ago, it practically never happened. Only planes offshore now and then, not even monthly, and virtually no suspended contrails ever visible at all. It was an especially noticeable event when they started appearing, to those of us who had already been paying attention.”

You’re underestimating the past prevalence of contrails, overestimating the current prevalence, and mistaking effect (persistence of contrails) with cause (atmospheric conditions favoring cirrus cloud formation).

September 30, 2015 at 4:03 pm

Mitch

Yes, blue anonymous, this system, like all the others, is rigged in support of those who are on top, the ones who are making its rules.

I try to think outside of my box; of course, none of us can really know for sure how successful or unsuccessful we are at the attempt to get out of our various boxes. Like you, I just rely on a combination of what I see in front of me and what I learn of history. Like you, I probably hold views which are heavily tinted by the ideas I learned when I was young.

I’m always trying to keep my ability to respond to new information, but that doesn’t mean I trust all new information.

Hell, I just learned today that Pope Francis isn’t what he’s been sold as, at least when it comes to issues of equality. I’ve updated my understanding of him, and will no doubt have many more updates every day.

September 30, 2015 at 5:04 pm

Henchman Of Justice

Pope Francis has a twisted, forked tongue.

To hell with the pontiff.

JLM5D

October 1, 2015 at 4:40 pm

Anonymous

“You’re underestimating the past prevalence of contrail”

Nope, I’m speaking from direct observation.

“overestimating the current prevalence”

Nope, I’m speaking from direct observation.

“and mistaking effect (persistence of contrails) with cause (atmospheric conditions favoring cirrus cloud formation).”

Nope, I’m far more aware than you are of how the various clouds in our sky take shape.

…and that’s just how ‘tiz, brudda.

October 2, 2015 at 4:00 am

Anonymous

“I’m speaking from direct observation.”

The earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. I’m speaking from direct observation, of course.

October 2, 2015 at 7:45 pm

Anonymous

“The earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. I’m speaking from direct observation, of course.”

But, just like with the sky over your head right now, you haven’t been observing enough or you’d still figure out the world is a sphere and the earth follows a path around the sun. However, if you really want to go meta, I’ll argue that your left foot is as much the center of the universe as mine. However still, based on your conclusions of all things chemtrail, I’m thinking metaphysics is way too deep a subject for ya.

	Just Trollin on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Just Trollin on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Eric Kirk on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Henchman Of Justice on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Just Trollin on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Mitch on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Mitch on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	Just Trollin on Jon Stewart: America lives in…
	humboldturtle on Justice Alito lied to Con…
	Henchman Of Justice on Justice Alito lied to Con…
	Mitch on Justice Alito lied to Con…
	humboldturtle on Justice Alito lied to Con…
	Eric Kirk on Justice Alito lied to Con…
	Just Trollin on Justice Alito lied to Con…
	Jon Yalcinkaya on We discuss the Trump jury deli…

Carbon Fees and Dividend on TNT Tonight

Recent Comments

Local Media

North Coast Blogs

Progressive Media

Sohum Blogs

Archives

Meta

Recent Posts

49 comments

Leave a comment

Carbon Fees and Dividend on TNT Tonight

Related

Recent Comments

Local Media

North Coast Blogs

Progressive Media

Sohum Blogs

Archives

Meta

Recent Posts

49 comments

Leave a comment