The most recent Scientific American has an article called 'How to Break the Climate Deadlock'. The main idea in the article is that progress on climate change can't be made with only reliance on free markets. There must be some government intervention, through carbon taxes or a trading system and then investment in renewable technology.
As some real world examples the author cites British Columbia. I found this brief article. http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2014/07/british-columbias-carbon-tax
She also gives a couple examples of using a trading system. The Clean Air Act to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions and what California did to improve air quality. China is mentioned also but there is no real data on their success or failure.
Another point is that markets alone can't work because markets don't account for external costs. The government would need to provide that through the use of a carbon tax or trading system. Once that's instituted then the markets can work from there. On the technology side, any major breakthrough and production on a large scale will need government assistance.
To quote something which sort of summarizes the article:
Of course this assumes you think climate change is a problem. The arguments in this article are mostly for those who recognize a problem but want to leave it to free markets. Thing is, I bet that's a small group. Most people who recognize a problem are probably also those who don't mind government action. :chuckle:
Does British Columbia provide a good framework to duplicate in the US? What should be done to spur real change?
As some real world examples the author cites British Columbia. I found this brief article. http://www.economist.com/blogs/americasview/2014/07/british-columbias-carbon-tax
BC’s levy started at C$10 ($9) a tonne in 2008 and rose by C$5 each year until it reached C$30 per tonne in 2012. That works out to 7 cents of the C$1.35 per litre Vancouver residents pay at the pump to fill up their vehicles. Because the tax must, by law in BC, be revenue-neutral, the province has cut income and corporate taxes to offset the revenue it gets from taxing carbon. BC now has the lowest personal income tax rate in Canada and one of the lowest corporate rates in North America, too. BC’s fuel consumption is also down. Over the past six years, the per-person consumption of fuels has dropped by 16% (although declines levelled off after the last tax increase in 2012). During that same period, per-person consumption in the rest of Canada rose by 3%. “Each year the evidence becomes stronger and stronger that the carbon tax is driving environmental gains,” says Stewart Elgie, an economics professor at University of Ottawa and head of Sustainable Prosperity, a pro-green think-tank. At the same time, BC’s economy has kept pace with the rest of the country. |
She also gives a couple examples of using a trading system. The Clean Air Act to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions and what California did to improve air quality. China is mentioned also but there is no real data on their success or failure.
Another point is that markets alone can't work because markets don't account for external costs. The government would need to provide that through the use of a carbon tax or trading system. Once that's instituted then the markets can work from there. On the technology side, any major breakthrough and production on a large scale will need government assistance.
To quote something which sort of summarizes the article:
A hefty price on carbon, coupled with major investment in technology, can definitely limit climate change. But both steps require government action. That suggests one other necessary step: we need to stop demonizing government and recognize its crucial role in doing the most important thing that markets do not do, which is prioritizing and sustaining the common good. |
Of course this assumes you think climate change is a problem. The arguments in this article are mostly for those who recognize a problem but want to leave it to free markets. Thing is, I bet that's a small group. Most people who recognize a problem are probably also those who don't mind government action. :chuckle:
Does British Columbia provide a good framework to duplicate in the US? What should be done to spur real change?