According to sustainable energy professor, Marc Jaccard, all the talk about carbon pricing is just hot air. The Simon Fraser prof has crunched the numbers and concludes that for Canada to meet its commitments from last year's Paris climate summit, the carbon price would have to come in at about $200 per tonne or almost seven times the $30 per tonne levied in British Columbia. That, in Dr. Jaccard's view, would be political suicide.
Jaccard points instead to a tool that is already reducing carbon in some of the world's largest economies — regulation.
"All climate policies that are actually effective are politically difficult," he said. "The only issue is which ones are more politically difficult.
"Taxes are more difficult than regulation."
Ottawa is grappling with climate-change policy in advance of an expected federal-provincial meeting on the matter later this year. Canada is on the hook to devise a way to meet its Paris goal of 30 per cent carbon reduction over 2005 levels by 2030.
Cabinet ministers have mused about imposing a national carbon price, while Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has suggested regulations could be part of the mix.
The regulations would phase out coal-fired power, require car builders to sell an increasing number of zero-emission vehicles, force trucks and buses to use more biodiesel and would cap the amount of carbon manufacturers are allowed to release per unit of production.
George Monbiot suggests a rationing system as the only effective way of dealing with climate change.
ReplyDeleteCarbon tax is flawed.
Much of the monies collected is used to give tax breaks to the carbon producing companies.
Carbon taxing is nothing but a derivative to produce more credit for the world of over use and over production..
TB
Hi, TB. You'll never see rationing because it would lead to a sudden decarbonizing of western economies and our societies. Third World countries, the least responsible and most vulnerable when it comes to global warming, would love a rationing system in which every nation was allocated a share, based on headcount, of the atmosphere's remaining carbon carrying capacity.
ReplyDeleteWe won't entertain the idea. Even with our lacklustre emissions reductions promises the developed world intends to remain the hands down dominant emitter of greenhouse gases. The "others" already outnumber us in the order of nearly 4 to 1. Rationing would therefore restrict us to just 20% of global emissions which would abruptly curtail privileged life as we've come to enjoy it. Standards of living might be cut by 40%, perhaps more.
Now tell me how many of your neighbours will vote for the guy who proposes a lifestyle change they would see as having to live in sackcloth and ashes?
If we reach a resolution to really combat global warming there will be people kicking and screaming no matter what happens.
ReplyDeleteYou still have not answered the my claim of carbon taxes being little more than more socialism for big oil and coal nor the idea that carbon taxes are little more than a new derivative with which we will use to further credit and growth
Credit is the tool that keeps the masses in oblivion to the realities of world events.
We now have multi generational denial!
Am I alone with this thought?
TB
The world is not immune.
ReplyDeleteAre we in for deep shit?
We are certainly not awake.
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/101east/2016/09/china-economy-160913081105227.html