Politicians and environmentalists have always been strange bedfellows, never more so than during current times. Our legislative leaders struggle to come up with a way to regulate the carbon trade, to ensure that business is, one way or the other, penalized for excess energy consumption. As the political landscape changes, we can see wild swings from one extreme to the other, as various schemes are considered to cut back on carbon emissions.

In 2009, the political landscape was such that the House of Representatives in the United States was able to pass a comprehensive raft of legislation, albeit narrowly. The controversial "cap and trade", also similar to EU's Emissions trading Scheme, is part of The American Clean Energy and Security Act. Despite the efforts required to pass this through the House, little has been achieved since that time in the Senate.

Politicians and environmentalists have always been strange bedfellows, never more so than during current times. Our legislative leaders struggle to come up with a way to regulate the carbon trade, to ensure that business is, one way or the other, penalized for excess energy consumption. Along with the rapid changes in the political landscape, we will be expecting several extreme changes in the schemes that are intended to curtail carbon emissions.

Carbon trade is the subject of much discussion as the spring unfolds in 2010. A trio of senior senators is hard at work crafting a bill that could at least bring some carbon trade legislation to the floor of the Senate as the year continues. Environmentalists are starting to wring their hands in despair however, as they see any real, meaningful legislation being watered down to enable a Senate passage.

Proposed by the House of Representatives, the cap and trade scheme will only have limited scope under the initial bill authored by Kerry, Graham and Lieberman. Players in the power sector will be most directly affected by the regulation on the cap and trade, and will eventually cascade to the rest of the sectors to which the scheme shall expand. As the Democrats within the U.S. Senate effectively lost its ability to "steamroller" legislation through when the late Sen. Kennedy's seat fell to a Democrat, from now forward the Republicans have a considerable amount of say in crafting climate legislation. They are known to be against a carbon trade scheme and a number of conciliatory features must be added to any legislation that has a chance of passing during the 2010 sessions.

Many have said that should widespread carbon legislation not materialize from Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency could move itself to try and regulate greenhouse gases. Should the Environmental Protection Agency regulate carbon emissions, for whatever valid reasons such as its being a health hazard, the Republicans will always look at this as an alternative route for the current administration to push forward with the desired reform.

Climate carbon trade restrictions represent some of the most controversial issues for politicians. As carbon emissions are directly linked to energy use, it is felt that no progress can be made in real world terms unless energy use is restricted, efficiencies achieved and alternative energy uses considered. While some state and regional initiatives are underway or in development, another controversial element of the Senate legislation under consideration is that any federal scheme would in turn cause a state or regional scheme to be canceled.

Whether 2010 brings federal carbon trade legislation or not, it is certain that in one way or the other every business will be forced to consider its energy use, to strive for sustainability and to ensure that it operates at maximum efficiency across the board.