In “Seven Reasons Why Taxing Carbon Won’t Fly (and shouldn’t)” I listed objections to a carbon tax and committed to describing a better, property-based carbon policy. Here are the how, who, what, where, and when of that policy. I start with “How.” “Why” is reserved for the third and last article in this series.
How. The policy is called Market Driven Compliance. MDC is an intensity-based emissions trading scheme, a cap and trade modeled after EPA’s averaging, banking and trading or ABT programs successfully controlling sulfur and benzene in gasoline and diesel for decades. Unlike other cap and trade structures…
In my earlier post, Seven Reasons Why Taxing Carbon Won’t Fly (and shouldn’t), I promised a second installment describing a good carbon policy that is not a carbon tax. For the sake of keeping each article readable, the second installment has evolved into a second and a third installment. The second will be published soon. While working on these articles, I want to share one fundamental reason why I find anthropogenic climate change a totally believable concept.
While believers and deniers argue about such things as whether CO2 is really good for plant life and, therefore, good for the planet…
Pricing is considered the best policy for reducing carbon emissions, and carbon taxation monopolizes the conversation. To be sure, a carbon tax will reduce emissions; we get less of anything we tax. The tax, however, has serious drawbacks worth discussing since other carbon pricing options are available. Adopting a carbon tax will, I fear, damage public confidence in government, which cannot afford further setbacks. We will likely have just one bite at the carbon policy apple. Do-overs may not be an option. This article lists seven flaws of taxing carbon.
A goal of environmental policy is creating order from chaos…
Bob Neufeld
Retired environmental compliance and government relations vice president for a small petroleum refiner. I have degrees in chemical engineering and law.
