Thank you for publishing on Feb. 12 the report “Companies’ climate targets not what they claim to be.” While flawed corporate carbon strategies are not news to many readers, studies such as this one help create the public and political will to change corporate behavior. A carbon fee and dividend is a more effective way to drive corporate change than the “greater transparency and stricter regulation” methods suggested by the report’s authors. A strong, economywide price on carbon could reduce America’s carbon pollution by 50% by 2030, putting us on track to reach net zero by 2050.
When government puts a price on carbon, corporate polluters pay a fee for the carbon pollution that will result from burning the fossil fuels they sell. Businesses respond by becoming more energy efficient and developing new production methods that use less carbon. These innovations will lead to reduced greenhouse gas emissions and will provide abundant, affordable and reliable clean energy. The money that is collected from corporations is given to the American public to spend with no restrictions. This protects low- and middle-income Americans who might otherwise bear a disproportionate burden during the transition to clean energy.
The European Union is already implementing a carbon border adjustment — a price on the carbon emitted during the production of carbon-intensive goods that are entering the EU. To remain globally competitive, the United States will need to rapidly decarbonize its fuel sources and production methods. CBAM and CF&D must gain bipartisan congressional support.
"Carbon Tax" = taxing every human being for breathing
Taxing carbon would be the most efficient way to reduce carbon. But unfortuantely it doesn't suit the agenda of the left that want to use the issue to gain political power,
Nope. It's a bipartisan effort with supporters on both sides of the aisle.
Ms. Hubbard – as long as you can get everyone on board with this carbon pricing wealth redistribution plan, go for it. But who do you believe is paying for these carbon taxes? It is not corporations, it is people. And when people realize their energy prices continue to rise and there's no effect on the environment because China and India and other developing countries are polluting to their hearts desire, perhaps these victims will realize the carbon tax is ineffective and a further waste of their money to enrich those pushing, as Mr. van Ulden has aptly named it, “this goofy structure”?
Dear Sarah - please elaborate on your economic model. I have seen a lot of items fly by the house lately but did not see any pigs among them. There is not a single EU member that has actually implemented this goofy structure; just talk and talk. Right up your alley.
If you sincerely believe that corporations are paying for this carbon tax, just examine how PG&E, under a similar program, Cap and Trade, is charging us higher rates and then gives back our own money once in a while after skimming off regulatory and corporate fees. I remember from my MBA economics classes that 'there ain't such thing as a free lunch'. Wonder why our electricity and gas rates are the highest in the nation?
As Sarah mentioned, carbon tax includes rebates directly to individuals. Cap and Trade as had some beneficial impact but is hampered in that it only applies to the largest corporations, it has too many loopholes, and it does not provide rebates to the people.
Welcome to the discussion.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.