NowPublic: North America's First Carbon Tax - Yay or Nay?

by ScienceDave | February 20, 2008 at 10:10 am
1215 views | 25 Recommendations | 10 comments

Photos

What comes first: You or the Planet

What comes first: You or the Planet

see larger image

uploaded by mridul

The first regional carbon tax in North America has been implemented in British Columbia, Canada.  No doubt, this will leave many left scratching their heads, and asking themselves, "What the hell is a carbon tax, anyways?"  I'm curious whether wikipedia's "Carbon tax" page will set its server aflame today.

What's a Carbon Tax?
It is what it is - a tax on products that emits carbon dioxide.  I think its pretty intuitive to think that such a tax might achieve two things:
  • Lowered emissions through a change in consumer habits (i.e. hitting the consumer in the pocketbook will stir them to be greener citizens)
  • Money obtained through such a tax will help develop greener technologies

There are a number of excellent resources on the net (see list below) on carbon taxes. According to the CBC, environmentalists in favor of a carbon tax believe that changing habits and our perception of fossil fuel consumption, by any means necessary, is of paramount importance in mitigating climate change.

Of course, it isn't all hunky dory.  Although revunue obtained from such taxes could be used to help mitigate the effects of carbon emissions, the question whether they would be is a matter of contention (i.e. the money could be used spent on setting up a giant, beaurocratic infrastructure instead).

Mark Jaccard, professor at Simon Fraser University (Burnaby, BC), recently wrote to the Vancouver Sun regarding BC's climate change policy.  I think he puts the confusion of any such tax among the public into clear light...

Some people will argue that subsidies are better. But they don't work.

Some will argue that regulations are better. In fact, they cost more, lead to more bureaucracy and can fail if not designed carefully.

Some will argue that carbon taxes hurt the poor. In fact, this is the only climate policy that provides revenue to compensate low-income people for slowly rising fossil fuel prices.

Some will argue that government will keep the carbon tax revenue. This is an especially challenging issue for our provincial government as it frames next month's budget.

Carbon tax advocates often talk of carbon-centred tax reform. Gradually, over several decades, the government raises taxes on the carbon-content of fuels and uses all revenue to decrease taxes on desirables like income and investment.

But what if government instead uses the carbon tax revenue to pay for transit investments? Some will love it. Some will feel betrayed.


What Are Our Other Options?
"Cap and trading" has become popular among many government types.  From the UNFCCC:

The Protocol allows countries that have emissions units to spare -- emissions permitted them but not "used" -- to sell this excess capacity to countries that are over their targets. This so-called "carbon market" -- so-named because carbon dioxide is the most widely produced greenhouse gas, and because emissions of other greenhouse gases will be recorded and counted in terms of their "carbon dioxide equivalents" -- is both flexible and realistic. Countries not meeting their commitments will be able to "buy" compliance. . . but the price may be steep. The higher the cost, the more pressure they will feel to use energy more efficiently and to research and promote the development of alternative sources of energy that have low or no emissions.

So, those who meet an internationally agreed upon limit (the "cap" in "cap and trade") of carbon emissions can sell extra credits obtained from being good little carbon emitting countries.  The incentive, then, is that countries will be able to make money from reducing carbon emissions.  Therefore, as more countries opt to make money from carbon emissions, the overall global CO2 emissions should decrease over time. Of course, the cap will have to be lowered once supply is in excess of demand to make this a feasible option.

The primary criticisms of such a scheme focus on setting up and regulating such a program (How do you ensure countries play along?). Furthermore, setting up a regulatory and validation mechanism to ensure that the carbon credits being sold by private companies are legit seems daunting. 

Concluding remarks

What are your thoughts NowPublicans? Some European countries adopted carbon taxes a decade ago, and are still alive and kicking.  Is it such a bad thing to set up a provincial commission promoting green and sustainable living with carbon tax revenue?

------ 

Useful links:

Carbon Taxes

Carbon Credit Trade

 

Advertisement
recommend This comment thread is now closed
Rachel Nixon
Rachel Nixon
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 10:55 on February 20th, 2008

ScienceDave, a well researched article - thanks

0
Mountaineer

Are the Chinese gonna pay this tax too??????

0
ScienceDave

If they are BC residents, then yes?

0
Mountaineer

You know what I mean, don't act smart!

Jordan Yerman
Jordan Yerman
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 12:34 on February 20th, 2008

My main concerns with a carbon tax are its deployment (I'm unconvinced that governments will really use this money for its intended purpose) and its effect: I'm not sure that raising prices will really change consumer behavior. Canadians have a rich history of letting themselves get ripped off, so the tax would have to be extraordinarily large in order to make a difference, in which case popular outcry would spell the career death of whoever championed it in Parliament.

 Also, Canada's population is tiny: the rest of the world would have to adopt a similar scheme, so we also have the tragedy of the commons to overcome.

0
ScienceDave

And it is tragic.

My lab mate is from Germany, and they implemented a similar "green tax" in 1999.  Apparently, the money accrued by teh goverment was not spent on green technologies, research, or anything related.  Instead, it was put into the country's retirement fund.

0
Barry ORegan

I agree with Jordan

Barry ORegan
Barry ORegan
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 14:30 on February 20th, 2008

ScienceDave,good story Dave, lots to mull over as well, cant wait for a year when an audit is done on what money went were to support this, as I am sure Disco Dance shoes will be handed all around to policitians, but not Carole, she is off top retirement land with a fat pension

0
ryan

I say this is something worth trying. The beauty of a tax as apposed to major infrastructure projects is that it can easily be tweaked according to behavioural patterns. But yes Jordan, this must be a collective effort, hopefully this is a first step. I can tell you, the price of gas is why I take the bus to work everyday.

0
atomcat

The Green's got the public to smile whle getting screwed over. Nice touch Mr. Suzuki.

Big business will not pay, you will.

You will find life more difficult and big business will  watch their profits rise.

The environment will stay the same.

Once again they win you lose.

Suzuki and the GREENS are the biggest scam this country has ever seen.

When you get on the BC ferry remember your tax dollars will not reduce the emmisions by one ounce.

Greens are dangerous and the average Joe is an idiot.

Canada is giving up her sovereignty and no one seems to notice.

Too bad it could have been a great nation. 

 

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

NowPublic on Facebook

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Rachel Nixon
First Flagged at 10:55 AM, Feb 20, 2008 by Rachel Nixon
These members have powered this story:

Most Recommended Stories in Environment

 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from