Carbon-swaps would lead to another derivatives bubble and those who created financial crisis would benefit once again, Congressmen warn

Aaron Dykes / Jones Report | April 27, 2009

After insisting once again that there is a consensus on man-made global warming (while paradoxically comparing those not in consensus with those who deny the moon landing), Al Gore obfuscates, downplays and refuses to discuss the role that CEOs have played in crafting his Cap-and-Trade C02 trading schemes and carbon swapping systems.

Al Gore tries to put a lid in Congressional committee testimony on a little reported but vitally important subject in the global warming, carbon-tax ‘debate’– the new derivatives bubble in the emerging green-energy credit-swap market.

Gore’s body language makes clear he does not want to dwell on the issue, as he spins every point critical of the carbon-schemes’ financial structure in light of the current financial meltdown into another dire warning about the much-heralded global warming meltdown that is said to be coming.

But Rep. Scalise and others try to turn focus on the huge financial burden that will be pinned on American taxpayers and U.S. industry. Scalise claims that President Obama has already scheduled in his budget an estimated $650 billion that would be generated under the carbon taxes proposed in the bill.

The point from Rep. Scalise that is gaveled over by the chairman and stuttered-over by Gore is that many of the Congressmen are ‘concerned about turning over our energy economy over to firms like Enron and some of these Wall Street firms that wrecked out financial economy.’

Fmr. Vice President Al Gore denies that Ken Lay and other CEOs developed carbon scheme: "I didn’t know him well enough to call him ‘Kenny-boy’."

But the point is a fair one. Gore’s founding partner in his carbon-trading / sustainability investment firm is none other than David Blood, CEO of Goldman Sachs’ asset-management division until 2003.

Gore & Blood founded Generation Investment Management, LLC in 2004– giving Gore an obvious conflict of interest in pushing a carbon tax.

Yet Gore ridicules the question: "I guess what you’re trying to say– state there is… some kind of guilt by association- is that–"

"I’m saying there are going to be big winners and big losers in this bill– big winners and big losers. Some of the big winners are some of the very financial experts that helped destroy our financial marketplace. And I think it should be noted that companies like Enron helped come up with this trading scheme that we’ve got," Scalise notes.

Scalise reiterates that because the architecture for carbon trading is set up much in the same way as credit-default swap derivatives were during the previous economic climate, and he and others, therefore, don’t feel comfortable handing over the energy economy over to them as well.

This is obvious. Don’t hand over the keys to the new energy system to those who’ve just been caught with their hand in the cookie jar during the current economic crisis. Even if incompetence is used to diffuse the blame for what is really criminal activity, such financial manipulators can’t and should not be trusted to take over a new system of swaps .

In a separate segment, Rep. Michael Burgess warns also about the ‘big winners and losers’ that could result from the currently-presented global-warming scheme.

"Why do we have be in a position of picking winners and losers? We’ve just watched a financial meltdown in this country the likes of which we haven’t seen in sometime… Now if people like credit-default swaps, they’re really going to like the carbon-swaps that are going to occur and the carbon-future swaps," Rep. Michael Burgess states.

He warns of another energy system with manipulation on the scale of the oil-futures market:

"We going to create, I fear, another such system that people that are– that have an inclination to react dishonestly to systems are going to have a new opportunity."

Barton estimates that 7 billion metric tons of manmade carbon per year would price at $700 billion dollars at a rate of $100 / per metric ton. This is not a small financial burden.

One can hear what is presumably former Vice President Gore breathing heavily into the microphone in a subtle but immature protest over even being questioned about the scientific analysis in any way.

Goldman Sachs and leveraged-buyout kings like Kohlberg, Kravis and Roberts have been seen in recent years attempting to pick off the bones of clean-energy schemes such as the TxU coal & energy deal in Texas.

Goldman Sachs is implicated all over the still-unfolding fallout from the last derivatives bubble? And have key former-associates in both the Bush Administration (Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson, Asst. Sec. Neel Kashkari) AND a key associate in the Obama Administration (Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner)?

This firm must not be allowed to drive a new form of taxation we already can’t afford. We must say no to more Blood & Gore. There’s been enough of this already.