How will the cap and trade bill affect the individual consumer?

Unfortunately the discussions are more driven by emotions and political orientation than by facts.

The discussion is based on the assumption that climate and environmental changes are to a large extent caused by human behavior. These environmental changes cause costs, for instance through declining water quality, poor weather (drought or excessive rainfall) tightening food supply and raising prices. Studies such as the Stern Report estimate that if there is no action on climate change, overall costs and risks are equivalent to 5% of global GDP.

So far the quality of the environment was a so called 'public good', which means everyone can consume it without having to pay a price for it. As a result, the overall costs were paid by the community and not by those who cause the environmental changes. The current view of governments and international organizations is that with deteriorating quality of the environment the costs should be better quantified and allocated to the ones who cause the changes and thus providing a financial incentive to reduce such costs.

The American Energy and Security Act, also known as the Waxman-Markey climate change bill, that was cleared by the House of Representatives on June 26 2009. A very simplified summary of the bill focusing, among other things, mainly on:

1) Renewable energy: requires utility service providers to use it for 6% of their power generation in 2012 and 25% by 2025.

2) Clean fuels and vehicles: provide greater incentives for electric vehicles.

3) Energy efficiency: requires energy savings in buildings, manufactured homes, appliances, transportation, industry and government.

4) Reducing global warming pollution: requires reductions in emissions and establishing a trade in permits to produce above emissions of a certain level. Reductions begin at 3% below 2005 levels in 2012, 20% below that level in 2020 and 83% below 2005 levels in 2050.

It is extremely difficult to estimate (1) the cost of the deterioration of the environment and (2) the cost impact of the bill on the economy. As a result, the debate is ongoing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the net annual economy wide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion—or about $175 per household. That cost includes restructuring the production and use of energy and of payments made to foreign entities under the program. Households in the lowest income quintile would see an average net benefit of about $40 in 2020, while households in the highest income quintile would see a net cost of $245.

In short, the aim is to initially charge the cost to the ones who cause the climate changes, i.e. the producers. The producers have, in a free market economy, the option to increase the prices of their products and thus pass the costs on to the consumer, but with the risk that the quantity they can sell at a higher price will decrease. The ultimate authority to decide whether or not he/she wants to pay the price is with the buyer, that is the consumer.

Cap and trade is expected to increase the price of electricity, but the average household only spends $100 a month on the it, so it will not cost them that much. The main reason for the opposition to the bill is that many Conservatives do not believe that Global warming is man made and/or that it will not be effective because India and China will still continue to Increase the production of CO2. There are also some silly provisions stuck into the bill that can be removes, but they still would not support it. However Cap and Trade is the preferred way to regulate by Conservatives and I believe that what you are referring to was the bill to stop the pollution that produce acid rain. It seems to have worked well .

Are you sure henry waxman didn't introduce the bill. "only be costs passed to consumer" think about everything that uses energy to get to you. then add up all the companies that will have to buy carbon credits in order to get the product to you. costs will rise dramatically not just your gas/ electricity bill. Lieberman was a democrat up until he didn't get the Dem's nomination in conn. he's only big on national security. same as republicans. cap and tax isn't about lowering carbon footprint it's about money and charging you so much it will actually hurt the economy by taking money out and giving more power to EPA.

Being that no one has read the bill in its entirety,the full extent of of its robbery has yet to be seen ,but what is known, is there will be massive increases in every ones daily cost of living (by the way,party affiliation means nothing in today's government,it is just a way to keep uninformed people bickering amongst themselves so they can keep playing their tyrannous game) GET RID OF THEM ALL!