[PASSED] Greenhouse Gas Cap and Trade Program

[Ransium]

Environmental - All Industries - Strong

The World Assembly,

Convinced that the preponderance of scientific evidence shows that some 'greenhouse gases', such as carbon dioxide and methane, allow energy through a planet's atmosphere at the visible and shortwave infrared wavelengths primarily generated by stars, while reflecting energy at longwave thermal wavelengths radiated by a planet, thus creating a net warming effect for that planet's atmosphere,

Acknowledging that within some member nations, the concept of global warming due to non-natural greenhouse gas emissions remains controversial,

Concerned over the many adverse impacts scientific consensus has found sudden and excess warming due to emissions of greenhouse gasses to have directly or indirectly on ecosystems and populations, including disruption and temporal shifting of seasonal cycles at a rate faster than many organisms can adapt, more extreme natural disasters, sea level rise, ocean acidification, crop failures, and desertification,

Aware that many nations' economies are built around fossil fuels and desiring to seek a solution that is minimally disruptive while addressing this pressing problem,

Concluding that the most efficient and cheapest regulatory framework to abate greenhouse gasses is one that caps the total amount of emissions, and divides up credits for the permissible emissions among nations, while allowing the voluntary trading of emissions credits between nations,

Hereby, subject to any limits set by earlier resolutions that are still in force:

1. Charges World Assembly Scientific Programme's (WASP) Atmospheric Chemistry Establishment (ACE) to regulate emissions of greenhouse gasses in the following manner:
   
   
   1. Set a total global annual target for the non-natural release of greenhouse gasses, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, based on current global emissions, scientific climate models for the impact of the gasses, decay rate of the gasses, and the global economic impact of the cap;
      
   2. Distribute allowable emissions credits for each regulated greenhouse gas among member nations proportional to their total populations and present economic output, the global population, and the global cap;
      
   3. Establish preferred emissions levels for non-World Assembly nations also proportional to factors listed in b;
      
   4. Establish (i) punitive fees for emissions beyond the cap for member nations, and (ii) tariffs that all member nations shall enforce on the trade goods produced by non-member nations whose emissions exceed their preferred levels; the proceeds of both the fees and tariffs will first go to ACE's monitoring and enforcement efforts and any remaining monies will go towards grants to fund the research, development, and implementation of green energy;
      
   5. Establish an exchange for the voluntary trade of emissions credits open to all member nations, such that some nations may exceed their initially allotted emissions without punitive action via buying credits;
      
   6. Create an annual schedule of diminishing total global caps for various gasses until levels scientifically modeled to be globally sustainable are met;
      
   7. Monitor the net emissions of individual nations, taking into account both greenhouse gas emissions and sequestration, via voluntary disclosures and other non-invasive methods, such as remote sensing that is sensitive to the narrowband absorption features of targeted greenhouse gases;
   
   
2. Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant member nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflict with religious or moral beliefs;
   
   
3. Notes that individual nations will determine how to best meet their preferred target internally; and
   
   
4. Clarifies that greenhouse gas emissions through natural sources, such as volcanoes, will not be considered by ACE for the purposes of this resolution.

Co-authored by imperium_anglorum

[Ransium]

FAQ:
Liberal Conspiracy Questions

Climate change is a bunch of liberal hoo-ha and you're a bad person for trying to kill my country's industry.

When I was younger I used to try to argue with climate change deniers. It's not how I choose to spend my time anymore. I know I won't convince you of my perspective nor will you convince me of yours. By all means vote against and try to convince others to do the same, but I personally won't be engaging you in serious debate. I would remind you all that, in the end this is just a game, so I would suggest everyone - supporters and detractors a like - try not to get too personal or grandiose in your arguments and attacks.

FT Questions

I represent the delegation from the FT-wank Empire, we control millions of planets, so doesn't your resolution therefore make no sense?

There's no wording in the resolution which prevents ACE from setting different targets for different planets.

Ah, but the FT-wank Empire relies entirely on fusion power and therefore has solved climate change!

Great! On planets with no major greenhouse gas emissions the targets would be set for current level, a target you will always meet, so this proposal will have no effect on you.

On the contrary, the FT-wank Empire is currently using climate change to terraform planets, surely ACE will step in and tell us to stop! We've already sent colony ships to those world. You're killing the FT-wank Empire's children!

Note that ACE sets caps based, in part, on "scientific climate models for the impact of the gasses," if the effect is to make a non-livable world livable ACE wouldn't have reason to regulate the emissions.

OOC: Maybe nobody else would ever bring this up besides me, but I felt I should take the liberty of augmenting your FAQ.

PMT Questions

Q: But our planet is already solving global warming by large-scale geoengineering! Look, see, the sun just got dimmer at 11:00 AM due to the giant parasol we stuck at the L1 LaGrange point! Global temperatures are stabilizing as we speak!

A: Nice job, but unless you actually cap carbon emissions, you're just going to have to cut off more and more sunlight as time goes on, until eventually you don't have enough light to grow crops. This scheme will also help temperatures stabilize faster than they would if you only relied on solettas. So really, you want this as much as I do.

Q: Nuh-uh! We're actually also using highly advanced carbon capture and de-oxygenation scrubbers that take in CO₂ and spit out charcoal and oxygen gas. So your proposal is totally useless and will destroy all economic growth.

A: Please. It's a physical inevitability that if you keep growing your economy by burning carbon, you're going to have to simultaneously keep building more scrubbers to get rid of the by-products. Eventually your economy will consist fully half of carbon scrubbing, leaving less and less people to do the actual work of building things and providing services and all that good stuff. This proposal means the carbon removal industry will remain limited to the niche at which it belongs, and the rest of your people can do things that are actually productive. You're welcome!

More to come I'm sure.

[Sougra]

While I'd prefer a revenue-neutral carbon tax of sorts, I am in support of this proposal. However, while I understand that the wool sweater clause, as I'll call it, is meant to be a joke and a punitive measure, I would like to raise the issue of if the nation believes in an ideology that restricts them from wearing wool for religious or moral reasons, be taken into account. I doubt this clause will be a part of the final, but nonetheless one can never truly know the mind and intentions of another.

[Ransium]

While I'd prefer a revenue-neutral carbon tax of sorts, I am in support of this proposal. However, while I understand that the wool sweater clause, as I'll call it is meant to be a joke and a punitive measure, I would like to raise the issue of if the nation believes in an ideology tat restricts them from wearing wool for religious or moral reasons, be taken into account. I doubt this clause will be a part of the final, but nonetheless one can never truly know the mind and intentions of another.

Done!

It's been suggested the wool sweater clause is needed in order to make the whole thing legal, as it avoids any question of a 'committee only' violation.

Other than that, personally it makes me smile and all my favorite resolutions have a dash of humor and whimsy in them.

[Stoskavanya]

Finally.

Strong support from this delegation thus far.

[Sougra]

Done!

It's been suggested the wool sweater clause is needed in order to make the whole thing legal, as it avoids any question of a 'committee only' violation.

Other than that, personally it makes me smile and all my favorite resolutions have a dash of humor and whimsy in them.

Thank you. And that makes sense, although I wouldn't exactly wish wearing wool sweaters on pretty much anyone. *shivers* I've had bad experiences with wool undershirts, and that was enough to make me never want to wear anything out of wool again.

[Uan aa Boa]

Full support. Additionally, as a plant-based nation with a strong high-tech manufacturing sector, we would like to offer discounted rates on synthetic jumpers, eco-friendly and optimised for scratchiness, in the hope that this will address any cultural concerns regarding the woollen ones.

[Norway and Iceland]

Support.

[Kenmoria]

“This measure has our support; it looks like a good proposal tackling climate change. Although, I would prefer it if you would number your active clauses and turn the current numerical list into an alphabetical one.”

[United Massachusetts]

Strong, Strong support.

[Ransium]

“This measure has our support; it looks like a good proposal tackling climate change. Although, I would prefer it if you would number your active clauses and turn the current numerical list into an alphabetical one.”

I've adjust the numbering and made some other minor tweaks. Thanks for your support and comment.

[Lord Dominator]

"Hrm, while I recognize that this can easily get around the question of different planets, I do think language specifying as much would be useful for clarity."

[Wallenburg]

Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflicts with religious or moral beliefs;

You have no idea how much I wish this could be in the final proposal.

[Ransium]

Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflicts with religious or moral beliefs;

You have no idea how much I wish this could be in the final proposal.

Why can’t it?

[United Massachusetts]

Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflicts with religious or moral beliefs;

LOL. This is great.

Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflicts with religious or moral beliefs;

You have no idea how much I wish this could be in the final proposal.

Why can’t it?

Forced RP, I guess. Like, metagaming?

[Wallenburg]

Why can’t it?

Forced RP, I guess. Like, metagaming?

This.

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Our country sees cap and trade as a viable method to combatting climate change. Our assembly has voted 61-39 in approving this measure despite strong opposition from the conservatives. We approve this resolution.

[Sholes]

This proposal is very well thought out and put together, and addresses environmental change as the serious threat it truly is. Sholes is in full support so that we may have a sustainable ecosystem for ourselves and the generations to come. I also suggest that nations that surpass the cap must also work to rectify the damage they have done by actively working to preserve the environment whether it is through planting more trees or endorsing charities and companies that aim to keep the planet sustainable and pollution-free.

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

This proposal is very well thought out and put together, and addresses environmental change as the serious threat it truly is. Sholes is in full support so that we may have a sustainable ecosystem for ourselves and the generations to come. I also suggest that nations that surpass the cap must also work to rectify the damage they have done by actively working to preserve the environment whether it is through planting more trees or endorsing charities and companies that aim to keep the planet sustainable and pollution-free.

Not necessary, nations that go beyond the cap will buy credits. In real life it works similar also, Companies that goes beyond the cap are have to buy credits.

[Imperium Anglorum]

(ed. quoting UM) Forced RP, I guess. Like, metagaming?

Really? How.

[Wallenburg]

(ed. quoting UM) Forced RP, I guess. Like, metagaming?

Really? How.

Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflicts with religious or moral beliefs;

That's how.

[Sciongrad]

Really? How.

Further mandates that ambassadors representing non-compliant nations be forced to wear itchy wool sweaters during the summer, unless doing so would be a threat to their health or conflicts with religious or moral beliefs;

That's how.

OOC: I actually don't know why that would be meta-gaming. It's not meta-gaming to force a nation's ambassadors or staff to do things. Read the Resolution Act, for instance, forces us all to employ GA staff that reads resolutions, and is clearly an IC attempt to make fun of the OOC tendencies of players to vote without reading. Meta-gaming prohibits us from actually acknowledging that this is a game in-text, like referring to delegates or the forum. Furthermore, "forced roleplay" is not against the rules. In the past, it was a very vague, totally unhelpful rule, but it's gone now. I'm not sure how we can ban "forced roleplay" when forced roleplaying is the entire basis of the GA game.

[Bears Armed]

That's how.

OOC: I actually don't know why that would be meta-gaming. It's not meta-gaming to force a nation's ambassadors or staff to do things. Read the Resolution Act, for instance, forces us all to employ GA staff that reads resolutions, and is clearly an IC attempt to make fun of the OOC tendencies of players to vote without reading. Meta-gaming prohibits us from actually acknowledging that this is a game in-text, like referring to delegates or the forum. Furthermore, "forced roleplay" is not against the rules. In the past, it was a very vague, totally unhelpful rule, but it's gone now. I'm not sure how we can ban "forced roleplay" when forced roleplaying is the entire basis of the GA game.

OOC: I understood that rule to mean "Proposals can't force anybody to recognize any particular piece of RP as canon."

[Ransium]

Sounds like the “wool sweater” clause stays.

[Aclion]

OOC: I actually don't know why that would be meta-gaming. It's not meta-gaming to force a nation's ambassadors or staff to do things. Read the Resolution Act, for instance, forces us all to employ GA staff that reads resolutions, and is clearly an IC attempt to make fun of the OOC tendencies of players to vote without reading. Meta-gaming prohibits us from actually acknowledging that this is a game in-text, like referring to delegates or the forum. Furthermore, "forced roleplay" is not against the rules. In the past, it was a very vague, totally unhelpful rule, but it's gone now. I'm not sure how we can ban "forced roleplay" when forced roleplaying is the entire basis of the GA game.

OOC: I understood that rule to mean "Proposals can't force anybody to recognize any particular piece of RP as canon."

So if someone doesn't like a resolution they can just say "Oh that didn't pass in my RP"?