Chris Gibson Quotes

Recently though, our State Governments have discussed instigating a carbon trading scheme - the details are still to be decided - and that's an encouraging sign.

When I am president of the United States of America, there will never be any cap-and-trade in the United States.

Because cap and trade is enforced through the selling and trading of permits, it actually perpetuates the pollution it is supposed to eliminate.

I think we can lower our emissions. I think the world will be better off if we did that, and we can do it without cap and trade.

Putting a tax on carbon could be an effective approach for curbing global warming pollution.

If you have a carbon cap and trade system, there'd be an agreed-to limit the amount of carbon we emit. That changes the economic picture for fossil technologies and for the renewable technologies. It makes the renewable technologies more attractive and the fossils less attractive.

Opponents of cap and trade should be careful what they wish for.

Well, I'm not saying that an emissions tax is ever going to be good policy.

I hope the EPA will listen to the many votes over the years in Congress opposing cap-and-trade and rescind that proposed rule.

The Liberals would love to have people believe that the choice is a carbon tax or nothing. I reject that.

We believe it is essential to establish federal emission reduction targets that can vary by state or region with policy flexibility for states to design solutions that work for their unique circumstances. Such targets would level the playing field and send a clear signal to business and industry as we transition to a clean energy economy.

I'd like to say that right now, in the last few years, the Democrats have been closer - have been more pro-environment. The coal industry is pretty well entrenched in the Republican Party and that's one of the things that we need to phase out.

Republicans are for clean water, clean air, and clean energy. We are not for taxing people out of their house, home and business to pay for it. And that is the fundamental difference between the Democrats and Republicans on this issue.

You don't get real reform by pandering to every special interest. With cap and trade we wound up with a bill that didn't accomplish much, was enormously complicated and expensive.

The reason we should do a carbon tax is because it's the right thing to do. It's economics 101, elementary stuff.

It seems the EPA has worked hard to devise new regulations that are designed to eliminate coal mining, coal burning, usage of coal.

Green policy is about triggering a shift to a cleaner way of doing things. To be effective, it needs to incentivise the right behaviour, for example through tax breaks, and that needs to be paid for by disincentives on polluting behaviour.

When I was in Minnesota serving in the state Senate and in Washington, D.C., I did everything I could to defeat cap and trade. I didn't work to implement cap and trade.

Cap and trade is an important tool in California's climate policy portfolio. It sends a price signal to industries to reduce their carbon pollution while generating billions of dollars in revenue for investments in clean transportation and direct pollution reduction.

As a California state legislator, I supported our cap-and-trade law to force polluters to pay for releasing harmful greenhouse gases to combat climate change.

Cap and trade is not an easy one for refiners, so we tried to get some moderation in the bill, and we did, but not near as much I would like.

Cap-and-trade is a dangerous policy fraught with the potential for significant corruption, and it would hurt my constituents and our economy by raising energy costs.

Canadians didn't vote for a carbon tax. Justin Trudeau campaigned, promised that he wouldn't create a carbon tax.

Forward-thinking energy policies protect our environment and drive our economy, strengthening businesses both small and large.

Government needs to do two things: put a price on carbon and invest heavily in new technologies.