Letters - Debating Climate Change - NYTimes.com

In “Betraying the Planet” (column, June 29), Paul Krugman asserts that those of us who oppose government regulation to deal with climate change are committing “treason against the planet.” I think Mr. Krugman is committing treason against reasoned debate.

One of the most compelling arguments against climate-change regulation is not that global warming isn’t occurring but, rather, that the dangers of further regulation far outweigh its likely benefits. Government regulation is inevitably a political animal; it’s never guided purely, or even largely, by disinterested science.

Is it treasonous to worry about the influence of interest groups on regulation? Is it treasonous to fear that centralizing more power in Washington will result in unforeseen negative consequences? Is it treasonous to believe that the threat to our well-being posed by further constraints upon markets is worse than the threat posed by higher temperatures?

Donald J. Boudreaux

The greenhouse gas has gone out of the carbon credit balloon

The carbon market has not escaped the effect of the recession. Irish Environment Minister John Gormley earlier this year asked the government-owned National Treasury Management Agency to stop buying carbon credits abroad as Ireland was close to meeting its targets under the Kyoto Protocol — a United Nations mechanism to reduce greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide — because of the recession. Under the agreement, industrialised countries must reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5,2% compared to their 1990 levels.