You may have heard of Conoco CEO Jim Mulva’s speech at CERAWeek [Cambridge Energy Research Associates — Dan Yergin’s consultancy]. You can read the verbatim speech here. Mulva allows that a price on carbon is needed [”in phases”], but by implication favors cap-and-trade. Not surprising, as that offers the biggest opportunities to cut special deals - or even to profit from what Conoco would have had to do anyway based upon pure economics.
Search
Latest Posts
RSS- Boost Private Investment to Boost the Economy
- The SoCal Foreclosure Market
- Foreclosures Triple: Housing Recovery is Just Crazy
- German bond auction fails –> fast deflating bond bubble?
- Distressed home sales continue to increase
- Looking To Short Real Estate Via ETFs
- Greg’s Favorite Eco Textbook
- A Home Without Equity Is Just a Rental With Debt
- Why housing prices will be much lower
- Small men with big guns
Latest Comments
RSS- JoAnne Taylor on the post School choice: where are Obama’s children educated?
- Recent Links Tagged With "operating" - JabberTags on the post China wants 100 Westinghouse AP1000 operating or under construction by 2020
- Kurt Schwindelberger on the post Oops: will GreenFuels biodiesel scheme work?
- gnomædh on the post Suspense Builds in the Automotive X Prize ‘Green Prix’
- Ray Bright on the post Shai Agassi: He could sell camels to Saudi Arabia
- Samuel Baker on the post KPMG: The Impact of a Financial Contagion
- Ditech Home Loans on the post The Rise and Fall of Subprime Mortgages
- Dr B B L Madhukar on the post Toshiba 4S reactor for Galena Alaska
- Chintan on the post Why is the TIPS yield curve inverted?
- Manuel on the post CDS: zero sum game, not
Category List
- Afghanistan (47)
- Africa (9)
- Al Qaeda (144)
- Apple (51)
- Avian Flu (29)
- Biology (17)
- Biotechnology (28)
- China (17)
- CIA (53)
- Climate Change (255)
- Climate Science (45)
- Constitution (11)
- Counter Terrorism (309)
- Cruising (1)
- Democracy (39)
- Economics (888)
- Education (81)
- Energy Policy (482)
- Entrepreneurship (20)
- EU (40)
- Financial Crisis (286)
- Fisheries Policy (5)
- Foreign Aid (3)
- Foreign Policy (264)
- France (21)
- General (45)
- Germany (2)
- Global Warming (194)
- Globalization (4)
- Healthcare (125)
- History (31)
- Homeland Security (50)
- Iran (147)
- Iraq (999)
- Iraq Oil (18)
- Islam (124)
- Israel (123)
- Katrina (31)
- Lebanon (61)
- Media (263)
- Middle East (105)
- Military (80)
- National debt (12)
- North Korea (18)
- NSA Intercepts (37)
- Nuclear Power (23)
- Palestine (41)
- Politics (391)
- Russia (11)
- Saudi (24)
- School Choice (23)
- Science (53)
- Science Policy (76)
- Space (9)
- Technology (422)
- Torture (6)
- True_False (6)
- U.K. (11)
- U.N. (23)
- Venezuela (3)
- Vietnam (16)
- Water Policy (1)
- What are you optimistic about? (12)
- World Health (4)
- X Prize (12)
Links
Links
- American Future
- Augean Stables
- Austin Bay
- Belgravia Dispatch
- Belmont Club
- Chicago Boyz
- Cori Dauber
- Counterterrorism Blog
- Crossroads Arabia
- David’s Medienktritik
- Foreign Policy Blog
- Harry’s Place
- Homeland Security Watch
- Jeff Jarvis
- Jim Miller on Politics
- Messopotamian
- Neo-Neocon
- OxBlog
- Press Think
- Prometheus-Science Policy
- Second Draft
- Spirit of America
- Sunlight Foundation
- Tigerhawk
- Winds of Change
0 Responses to “Energy Security and Climate Change: The Case for Engagement”