This post is from an Article by Matt Simon, a Science Journalist at WIRED, where he covers: Biology, Cannabis, the Environment, and Robotics.
The idea of a Carbon Tax for the vast Majority of Republicans, the Idea is Anathema, and for Democrats it's One among several Policies that compete for the love of Lawmakers and Climate Wonks.
But Politics, like the Climate, is Volatile these days. In the past couple of years, some Republicans have Broken Ranks with their Party to support a Tax on Carbon Emissions, perhaps because the Climate is becoming more salient with Voters, perhaps as a foil to the more Radical Green New Deal, or perhaps to do something to Stop Global Warming. Given that tiny bump in Bipartisan Momentum, it's worth Revisiting the case for a Carbon Tax.
If you want to Discourage Bad Behaviors, Economists say, make them Expensive. The Strategy works for: Cigarettes, Gasoline, and Soda, And it works for Carbon Emissions too. Adding a Charge to the Carbon Content of Fossil Fuels is widely seen as One of the more Powerful Tools a Country can use to Shrink its Emissions.
It works like this: A Government Charges a Fee-per-Ton of Greenhouse Gases Emitted. The Fee is Small at first, Rising gradually to give Companies a chance to Adapt. Individual Households don't get Taxed directly, but they could take a Hit when the Big Emitters raise their Rates in response.
“The beauty of a carbon tax is that everything we want consumers to do gets incentivized to be done,” says MIT Economist Christopher Knittel. Residents Pay more attention to their Thermostats. Utilities might Invest more in Solar or Wind Farms. Manufacturers could start offering more Energy-Saving Products, such as more Efficient Cars and Heating/Air-Conditioning Systems.
Several Countries have Implemented some form of Carbon Pricing, just Not the Most-Offending Nations:
After Sweden instituted a Tax in 1991, its Transportation Emissions fell an average of 6% a year, and a separate Tax on Transport Fuels shrank the Country's Carbon Footprint further.
In British Columbia, a Carbon Tax reduced Emissions by up to 15%. Last year, after the Province's Experiment proved Successful.
Canada expanded Carbon Pricing Nationwide.
Researchers at MIT calculated that if the U.S. placed a $50-per-Ton Tax on Carbon and Increased the Tax 5% per year, Emissions would Drop 63% by 2050.
If every Country adopted a Carbon Tax with a similar Effect, the World might be able to Slash its Emissions in Half by the Middle of this Century.
A U.S. Tax Credit for Carbon Storage Passed in 2018 could spur Retrofits of Power Plants that would in turn Capture 54 Million Tons of Carbon per Year by 2030. That's the Equivalent of taking some 10 Million Cars off the Streets.
The Idea that has lately taken off among Certain Conservatives is one that Cuts the Sourness of a Carbon Tax with some Sweeteners. U.S. Representative Francis Rooney (R-FL, 19th District), has Co-Sponsored Legislation that would Impose a Fee on Metric Tons of Carbon Emitted and then Distribute the Spoils back to U.S. Residents as a Monthly “Carbon Dividend”, like a form of Basic Income.
In One Proposal, crafted by the Bipartisan Climate Leadership Council (CLC), a Family of Four might expect to get $2,000 back in the First year. Plans put forward by Rooney and the CLC also propose to Eliminate or Suspend Federal Regulations on Carbon Emissions, which perhaps helps explain why the CLC has the Support of: Car Manufacturers, Oil Giants, and Utility Companies.
Ultimately, a Carbon Tax needs to be Global to reach its Full Potential. After all, Heavy-Emitting Industries can Flee to Nations that have No Carbon Pricing. Placing a Carbon Tariff on Goods Imported from such Places can Incentivize Dirtier Countries to Clean-Up their Acts. The European Union is now considering such a Measure. Revenue from that kind of Tariff could again help Fund a Dividend, to Shield People from Rising Costs.
All good Ideas, but none too likely Pass during the current U.S. Administration, which has Pushed Tax Cuts and Denied the Severity of Climate Change.
Campaigns to Implement One in Washington State have Failed Twice. There are other Options. Mark Jaccard, an Economist who helped design British Columbia's Carbon Tax, argues that a Country can Tighten Regulations instead, choosing to Phase-Out Coal Plants or Implement a Low-Carbon Fuel Standard. Regulations “may be way better politically, like way better, and only slightly less efficient economically,” Jaccard says. The Key to Saving the World? It's All Politics.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
