re:  "Cap-and-trade-off"

In your May 24 editorial, the Chronicle lauds the "landmark" bill being developed in the US Congress with the ostensible goal of limiting emissions of so-called "greenhouse gases", particularly CO2, through the implementation of a cap-and-trade system.  The editorial claims that the "compromise bill ... spreads the costs" of such a system; however, nowhere in the editorial is the full and actual cost of such a program stated, nor is any information giving about precisely how much global warming will be decreased through implementing cap-and-trade.  Is it one degree?  0.1 degree?  5 degrees?

It would seem reasonable that prior to asserting that any program amounts to "exercising leadership", one should know precisely what is being achieved and at what cost.  No such cost-benefit analysis has ever been provided for this or other proposed cap-and-trade systems.  This hardly seems like an efficient, effective method of operation on even the least imposing of government programs, much less for something as far-reaching and intrusive as cap-and-trade.

Sincerely,
Dave Smith
Houston, TX