Showing posts with label carbon tax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label carbon tax. Show all posts

Friday, December 2, 2016

Ontario’s Auditor General Slams the Province’s Pending Cap and Trade Fiasco.


Ontario’s Auditor General Slams the Province’s Pending Cap and Trade Fiasco. (probeinternational).

Ontario’s Auditor General (AG) has once again set her sights on the province’s energy sector – this time slamming the upcoming implementation of the cap and trade market. The policy, which kicks in at the beginning of 2017, will cost Ontarians billions of dollars in additional heating and transportation charges, lead to even higher electricity rate increases than are already expected, send billions of dollars from the Ontario economy to California and Quebec and vastly overstate any environmental benefits.

In short, the AG’s report adds to Consumer Policy Institute’s previous criticism of cap and trade that detailed how the biggest winner from the policy will be Queen’s Park, which will have the power to create and distribute any amount of credits it wishes and use any revenue from the program to fund a suite of pet projects that will have little-to-no environmental benefits.


The AG highlighted that the small number of emissions that will incur in Ontario as a result of cap and trade will come at a major cost for the province’s households and businesses, which are already struggling from the fastest electricity rate increases of anywhere in North America.

Between 2017 and 2020, households and businesses will be forced to buy $8 billion worth of carbon credits that the province intends to auction off each quarter. The annual (direct and indirect) cost to the average household will rise to $285 by 2019 (households that drive more miles will pay more). The impact on rural and northern households, which are already suffering from high energy costs, haven’t been analysed by the province.

Cap and trade will also make electricity price hikes worse for industrial customers, according to the AG. Even though the province will use billions of dollars in proceeds from its carbon credit auctions as a subsidy to lower hydro bills, by 2030, large industrial customers will experience a 7% increase in their electricity rate that is “directly attributable to cap and trade.” This price hike is over and above the increases that the province has already laid out in its Long-Term Energy Plan. Hmmm....Once again the main goal of the Wynne 'Admin' is to collect more tax revenue .  Read the full story here.

RELATED:

Thursday, November 3, 2016

'The road to Hell is paved with Empty promises' Climate Promises Can't stop Asia's Coal Addiction.


'The road to Hell is paved with Empty promises' Climate Promises Can't stop Asia's Coal Addiction. (Bloomberg).
Asia’s demand for coal is likely to increase for years to come even though countries including China, Japan and India have agreed on steps to limit fossil-fuel pollution damaging the climate.
That’s the conclusion an analysis of Bloomberg New Energy Finance delivered at its conference in Shanghai on Wednesday. The charts below from a presentation by BNEF founder Michael Liebreich show the impact China’s coal consumption will have on the world’s climate goals.

At the same time, clean-energy investment is set to drop.

Clean energy investment will be down 15 to 20 percent this year,” Liebreich said in an interview in Shanghai. “As things stand, it will not bounce back to a new record in the next five years” because of sluggish economic growth, moves by policymakers to reduce costs and the falling price of wind and solar equipment.

Meanwhile some 'Geniuses' will introduce carbon taxes on their economies killing all future growth. It really takes a special kind of stupid. Read the full story here.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Video - 'Real Change' - The Soros connection: Anti-oil activist Marlo Raynolds now Trudeau's Environment Min. chief of staff.



Read the full story here.

Saudi Arabia warns of supply crisis if low prices persist.


KSA warns of supply crisis if low prices persist. (AN).

JEDDAH: Long-term oil market fundamentals remain robust but prolonged low prices could threaten security of supply and pave the way for a price spike, warned Saudi Arabia on Monday.

Prince Abdul Aziz bin Salman, deputy minister of petroleum and mineral resources, told a round table meeting for Asian energy ministers in Doha that the oil and gas industry has canceled around $200 billion of investments this year, with energy companies planning to cut another 3 to 8 percent from their investments next year, marking the first time since the mid-1980s that industry cut the spending for two consecutive years.

He said current sharp oil price fluctuations are very harmful to oil producers, consumers and workers alike.

Just like high oil prices can’t last, a prolonged period of low prices is “also unsustainable, as it will induce large investment cuts and reduce the resilience of the oil industry, undermining the future security of supply and setting the scene for another sharp price rise,” said the prince.

“As a responsible and reliable producer with long-term horizon, the Kingdom is committed to continuing to invest in its oil and gas sector, despite the drop in the oil price,” he said.

Prince Abdul Aziz pointed out: “Despite all the macroeconomic uncertainties engulfing the global economy, oil demand continues to grow at a robust pace and set to increase by 1.5 million bpd in 2015, the strongest growth seen in the past few years. This is in contrast to the early 1980s where global oil consumption fell between 1980 and 1984 by more than 2.3 million bpd.”

In order to meet the expected increase in demand, the world needs all sources of energy, including oil, gas, renewables, nuclear, and solar, he said.

The Kingdom has always been of the view that there are plenty of resources to meet the projected increase in demand.

After three years of positive growth, non-OPEC supply is expected to fall in 2016; only one year after the deep cuts in investment,” said Prince Abdul Aziz.

He said Saudi Arabia plays, and will continue to play, a proactive role in stabilizing oil market conditions by building on its close relationship and ongoing cooperation with both producers and consumers, and through its effective and constructive engagement in OPEC and The International Energy Forum. Hmmm.....Expect Coming December OPEC meeting to result in a serious price hike. For Canada it will be a double whammy as the Trudeau gov is planning a carbon tax on petrol as well, this will do wonders for the economy.

HT And source:



Monday, June 30, 2014

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Obama 'tool' EPA to be challenged at SCOTUS over climate change.


Obama 'tool' EPA to be challenged at SCOTUS over climate change.(Reuters).By Lawrence Hurley.
WASHINGTON – In a blow to the Obama administration, the Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear a challenge to part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s first wave of regulations aimed at tackling climate change.
By agreeing to hear a single question of the many presented by nine different petitioners, the court set up its biggest environmental dispute since 2007.

That question is whether the EPA correctly determined that its decision to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles necessarily required it also to regulate emissions from stationary sources.

The EPA regulations are among President Barack Obama’s most significant measures to address climate change. The U.S. Senate in 2010 scuttled his effort to pass a federal law that would, among other things, have set a cap on greenhouse gas emissions.

By agreeing to hear a consolidated challenge from states and business groups, the court could be getting set to limit the reach of its groundbreaking 2007 ruling, Massachusetts v. EPA, in which it held on a 5-4 vote that carbon was a pollutant that could potentially be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

The court rejected outright three of the nine petitions that sought Supreme Court review, including one filed by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican, that questioned whether the EPA appropriately weighed climate change science.

The legal question, crafted by the court itself from those raised in the six petitions it agreed to review, indicates the court does not plan to revisit the underlying reasoning behind Massachusetts v. EPA but will weigh whether the EPA went further than allowed under the act.

The American Petroleum Institute, a lobbying group that along with manufacturing interests filed one of the petitions, said the fact that EPA regulations for cars automatically triggered further regulation of other sources of greenhouse gas emissions was an "overstep" of the agency's authority under the Clean Air Act.

"The EPA is seeking to regulate U.S. manufacturing in a way that Congress never planned and never intended," said Harry Ng, American Petroleum Institute vice president and general counsel.

Whatever the court eventually decides, the EPA's ability to use the Clean Air Act to regulate emissions from power plants and other stationary sources is not under threat, environmental lawyers say.

Even if the court ruled for petitioners, most power plants and refineries would still be required to install best available control technology to limit greenhouse gases, said Sean Donahue, a lawyer representing environmental groups at Donahue and Goldberg.Read the full story here.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

"Global Warming" - 'Sure looks like global temperatures track Total Solar Irradiance.'


                                       Reconstructed TSI (solar flux) chart 1610 to 2012.

"Global Warming" - 'Sure looks like global temperatures track Total Solar Irradiance.'HT: IceAgeNow.

See how low the TSI was during the Little Ice Age? And how high it was in the late 1900s?
How can anyone look at this chart and think that anything other than the sun drives our climate?

See larger version of chart here:  http://lasp.colorado.edu/lisird/tsi/historical_tsi.html


Sure looks like global temperatures track Total Solar Irradiance,” says @NJSnowfan. Thanks to @NJSnowFan for this link

Thursday, October 10, 2013

"Global Warming" - Eskimo walrus harvest down 83% in Alaska village – Too much ice.


"Global Warming" - Eskimo walrus harvest down 83% in Alaska village – Too much ice.HT: IceAgeNow.

Residents scrambling to find alternate sources of food before winter sets in.
Gambell, Alaska – For as long as many here can remember, hunters in this tiny village on St. Lawrence Island have managed to kill enough walruses to last through the brutal Arctic winter. After harvesting only 108 walruses this year, residents are scrambling to find alternate sources of food before winter sets in.

Unusually thick ice in the Bering Sea.

The ice was so bad we couldn’t get out,” said Brian Aningayou. The 38-year-old hunter bagged only four walruses compared with his normal take of 20.

See photos of Gambell:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303464504579109442504589158.html#slide/1

Thursday, October 3, 2013

'Global Warming' - Moscow weather: Cold spell could break records.


Moscow weather: Cold spell could break records.(MN).

Moscow is in the grips of a cold spell, and the abnormally low temperatures are not about to let up, weather forecasters say.

The first week of October will be chilly, with temperatures on Tuesday and Wednesday hovering between 0 and 7 degrees Celsius, according to Gidrometcenter, Russia’s official weather forecasting service. According to Fobos, temperatures could drop to minus 3 degrees, with snow and ice.

Those temperatures are about 5-7 degrees lower than the average for this time of year.

“This week the weather will be more like it is in late October,” RIA Novosti quoted a statement from the Fobos Weather Center as saying. “We are under the spell of very cold air. It’s quite likely that there will be record-low temperatures at night.
By Thursday, temperatures could drop to negative 5 degrees at night.
Slightly warmer weather is expected towards the weekend, but the temperatures will still be 4 degrees below the norm, according to Gidrometcenter.

Monday, September 30, 2013

"Global Warming Scam" - IPCC report “A Cowardly Cover-Up and a disgrace to science,” says astrophysicist.


"Global Warming Scam" - IPCC report “A Cowardly Cover-Up and a disgrace to science,” says astrophysicist.HT: IceAgeNow.


If followed, (it) will lead to malnutrition, starvation and impoverishment of millions as world agriculture and economies are hit by the developing Mini-Ice-Age."
Piers Corbyn, astrophysicist and long-range weather and climate scientist and forecaster, comprehensively, scientifically, demolishes the UN IPCC 5th Report and MetOffice/BBC role in a 12page pdf complete with exciting graphs and dynamic quotes.

“The report is indeed totally laughable but also deadly dangerous,” says Piers.


It is a cowardly cover-up of climate reality in which the BBC and Met Office play an especially dishonest role and an utter disgrace to science. It is a product of self-interested warmist parasites and Big Oil & energy giants who gain from high energy charges.

“It points the world in the wrong direction and if followed will lead to malnutrition, starvation and impoverishment of millions as world agriculture and economies are hit by the developing Mini-Ice-Age while the UN IPCC and Governments (Australia now excepted) impose green taxes in supposed preparation for warming climate changes which are opposite to what will happen.

the UN IPCC, Governments, Met Office and warmist media BBC, New York Times etc….prefer the public to suffer and even die than admit their deluded CO2 theory has failed every objective scientific test and can predict nothing."

See entire pdf:   http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews13No39.pdf

Related:  Coldest September in Moscow this century.Record cold week in Eastern Europe

Many regions are expecting snowfall for the first time this season. It is estimated that the east of the continent and the Black Sea region will see temperatures up to 10-12 ° C cooler than normal.


Saturday, February 23, 2013

"How Will a Carbon Tax stop or cure this?" - Melting Permafrost: 'Scientists Warn of Dangers of Trapped Carbon'.


"How Will a Carbon Tax stop or cure this?" - Melting Permafrost: 'Scientists Warn of Dangers of Trapped Carbon'.(Spiegel).Research published Thursday in the journal Science says that even slightly warmer temperatures could start melting permafrost, which in turn threatens to trigger the release of huge amounts of greenhouse gases trapped in ice.
The frosty dungeon hides a dark secret. At least a quarter of the Northern Hemisphere's landmass is frozen and, like a vault, it holds 1,700 gigatonnes of carbon. This unimaginably high quantity of carbon comes from countless generations of creatures that have lived and died in the area over millions of years.
A portion of those dead plants and animals weren't decomposed by microorganisms because, at a certain point, it was simply too cold for that. But the permafrost is slowly melting. If large areas of ground underneath were to thaw one day, the bacterial decomposition process would pick up where it left off, releasing huge amounts of greenhouse gases. In total, permafrost contains twice as much carbon as what is currently billowing through the Earth's atmosphere.
If major portions of that carbon become released, the world's climate would suffer fatal consequences. For this reason, scientists have for some time now been asking the frightening question of just how strongly global warming affects permafrost areas. Using ingenious measuring methods, they are meticulously monitoring the fate of the planet. A new study, published in the professional journal Science on Thursday, suggests that it's possible that even slightly higher temperatures could thaw out significant portions of the region's permafrost areas.
A portion of those dead plants and animals weren't decomposed by microorganisms because, at a certain point, it was simply too cold for that. But the permafrost is slowly melting. If large areas of ground underneath were to thaw one day, the bacterial decomposition process would pick up where it left off, releasing huge amounts of greenhouse gases. In total, permafrost contains twice as much carbon as what is currently billowing through the Earth's atmosphere.
In periods with higher tempatures, the permafrost retreats further north. The Lenskaya Ledyanaya Cave lies at 40 degrees north latitude, in an area currently on the border of continuous permafrost. If the temperatures rise another one or two degrees, to approach something like what they were in the interglacial period 400,000 years ago, the situation would most likely look differently. "That is probably the threshold where continuous permafrost becomes vulnerable," says Vaks.
If major portions of that carbon become released, the world's climate would suffer fatal consequences. For this reason, scientists have for some time now been asking the frightening question of just how strongly global warming affects permafrost areas. Using ingenious measuring methods, they are meticulously monitoring the fate of the planet. A new study, published in the professional journal Science on Thursday, suggests that it's possible that even slightly higher temperatures could thaw out significant portions of the region's permafrost areas. Read the full story here.

'Emperor' Obama to circumvent lawful due process on climate.


'Emperor' Obama to circumvent lawful due process on climate.HT: Wattsupwiththat.Posted on February 22, 2013.By Anthony Watts.

FLASHBACK March 2011: Obama on Deporting Illegals ‘America Is a Nation of Laws,’ Presidential Action Not ‘Appropriate’ Obama Administration Moves Forward on Climate Change Without Congress Forthcoming regulation likely means no new coal-fired power plants will be built in the United States By Rebekah Metzler February 22, 2013
President Barack Obama is tired of waiting for Congress to move on legislation to reduce carbon emissions, and his administration is poised to move forward on actions to do just that—including a move that will effectively eliminate the possibility of any new coal plant opening in the United States, experts say.

We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence,” Obama said during his State of the Union address. “Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science—and act before it’s too late.”

Source: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/22/obama-administration-moves-forward-on-climate-change-without-congress

Sure, let’s ignore China and Germany building new coal plants like there is no tomorrow because some activist idiots (led by “death train” Hansen)have made the weak minded afraid of the weather.

What happens when people start dying in the cold winters because they can’t afford electricity? This is already happening in Britain.

Hmmmm........ShoreBank, Obama’s Mother and Geithner’s Father – Coincidences?There is also a solid link between the Islamic Banking Cooperative, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, The Ford Foundation, Devron Bank of Chicago and the Bank of Indonesia (Stanley A. Dunham was a research coordinator at this bank and a program officer for the Ford Foundation).


Related : ShoreBank - Obama - CarbonTrading.


Monday, February 18, 2013

Carbon tax hallucinations.


Carbon tax hallucinations.(WUWT).By Paul Driessen.
Average planetary temperatures haven’t budged in 16 years. Hurricanes and strong tornadoes are at or near their lowest ebb in decades. Global sea ice is back to normal, Arctic ice is nearly normal, and the Antarctic icepack continues to grow. The rate of sea level rise remains what it was in 1900.
And yet, President Obama and many politicians, newscasters and alarmist scientists continue to insist that carbon dioxide emissions are changing Earth’s climate, and we need to take immediate action to prevent storms like Hurricane Sandy and avert catastrophes predicted by IPCC computer models and alleged “scientific consensus.” Not surprisingly, polls show public support for controlling CO2 output and taxing hydrocarbon use – to “ensure climate security” and “save vital federal programs” from budgetary axes.
As the liberal lobby Think Progress put it, people “overwhelmingly” prefer a carbon tax on “big polluters” versus cuts in favorite programs “like education, Social Security, Medicare and environmental protection.”
Five-alarm climate claims, skewed polling questions and phony taxes-versus-grandma budget alternatives will almost always ensure support for carbon taxes – especially among Bigger Government and Ban Fossil Fuels constituencies. More rational analysis reveals that dreams of hundred-billion-dollar windfalls from slapping regressive new taxes on job creation and economic growth are nothing more than dangerous tax revenue hallucinations. They would bring intense pain for no climate or economic gain.
Employing Energy Information Administration data, a recent Heritage Foundation study by economists David Kreutzer and Nicolas Loris found that a tax starting at $25-per-ton of CO2 emitted and increasing by 5% per year would cut a family of four’s income by $1,400 annually, raise their utility bills by $500 a year, and increase gasoline fill-ups by up to 50 cents per gallon. That’s $2,000 a year chopped from their budget for food, vacations, home and car payments and repairs, college and retirement savings, dental and medical care, and overall quality of life.
Even “millionaire” families making $200,000 a year would find such a hit painful. While the poorest families might get some offsetting tax relief, most would get nothing – nor would employers.
Carbon taxes would thus increase the likelihood that many breadwinners will end up unemployed, since the tax would raise business energy costs dramatically, force companies to trim hours and/or employees, and result in an aggregate loss of at least 1 million jobs by 2016, Heritage notes. That would bring more home foreclosures, greater stress, reduced nutrition, and more strokes and heart attacks, especially for older workers whose odds of finding new employment are increasingly bleak.

No small businesses or energy-intensive manufacturing companies would get a rebate for their soaring carbon taxes. Nor would any mall, hospital, school, church, synagogue or charity group.
Hydrocarbons provide over 83% of all the energy that powers America. A carbon tax would put a hefty surcharge on everything we make, grow, ship, eat and do. It would put the federal government in control of, not just one-sixth of our economy as under Obamacare, but 100% of our economy and lives. It would make the United States increasingly less productive, less competitive globally, less able to provide opportunities for our children.
But it gets worse, because this tax on America’s energy and productivity is not being promoted in a vacuum. It would be imposed on top of countless other job and economy strangling actions.
President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has already issued 2,071 new rules and dispensed a regulatory burden of over $353 billion per year – equal to all wealth generated annually by Virginia’s private sector. It is now preparing still more rules, the most crushing of which would regulate the same CO2 emissions that some in Congress want to tax, from both moving and stationary sources. Most, if not all of its punitive rules, are based on exaggerated risks, fear mongering, junk science, and illusory health, welfare, “environmental justice” and “sustainability” benefits.
Other agencies are inflicting still more rules, and more crushing paperwork burdens. Obamacare alone will add 127,602,371 more hours per year to the federal paperwork burden for American businesses and families. That’s enough time to carve 1,039 Mount Rushmore monuments, says the Washington Examiner. Even at $25 per hour, that’s $32 billion a year. On top of that, there are the Dodd-Frank financial requirements and myriad other costly, time-consuming, economy-sapping, job-killing rules.
Meanwhile, federal “discretionary” spending skyrocketed another $129 billion annually in just four years under Obama. That’s comparable to what carbon tax snake oil salesmen claim a $25-per-ton tax would raise each year, several years into a steadily escalating tax, using static analyses that ignore all these “concrete lifesaver” effects.

And for what? The Kyoto Protocol is dead. Japan and many other countries are rejecting any new binding emission targets. China, India, other rapidly developing nations, and even Germany and Europe are burning more coal, emitting more carbon dioxide, and sending atmospheric CO2 levels higher.
And yet, average planetary temperatures show no trend up or down, and global hurricane activity stands at a near-record low. There’s no change in big tornadoes, droughts or rains averaged over the USA for the past century. Polar sea ice is down slightly in the Northern Hemisphere, but up in the Southern. And sea levels show no measurable deviation from trends over the last hundred years.
The only thing that will happen if carbon taxes are inflicted on the US economy is that American jobs, economic growth, living standards, health, dreams and lives will be sacrificed for nothing
We need to stop basing laws and policies on hallucinations – and start basing them on reality.Read the full story here.

Related : ShoreBank - Obama - CarbonTrading.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/229805/shady-shorebank-bailout/michelle-malkin

http://knowledgecreatespower.blogspot.com/2010/05/shore-bank-obamas-mother-and-geithners.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/shorebank.php

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

SURPRISE: Carbon Tax bill coming Thursday.


SURPRISE: Carbon Tax bill coming Thursday.(WUWT). Senators Bernie Sanders and Barbara Boxer will outline the legislation on Thursday morning.

Billed as “major” and “comprehensive” legislation, and will have a carbon tax, Here is the statement from Sanders’ office (bold mine):

Sanders, Boxer to Introduce Major Climate Change Legislation

February 12, 2013

WASHINGTON, Feb 12 – Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) will hold a news conference on Thursday, Feb. 14 to announce comprehensive legislation on climate change. Boxer is Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Sanders serves on the environment committee and also is a member of the Senate energy committee.

Under the legislation, a fee on carbon pollution emissions would fund historic investments in energy efficiency and sustainable energy technologies such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass. The proposal also would provide rebates to consumers to offset any efforts by oil, coal or gas companies to raise prices.

Environment and consumer leaders set to participate include Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org; Mike Brune, executive director of Sierra Club; Tara McGuiness, executive director of the Center for American Progress Action Fund; Tyson Slocum, Public Citizen’s energy director; and David Bradley, National Community Action Foundation executive director.

Who:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)

Bill McKibben, 350.org founder

Mike Brune, Sierra Club executive director

Tara McGuiness, CAP Action Fund executive director

Tyson Slocum, Public Citizen’s Energy Program director

David Bradley, National Community Action Foundation executive director

What: News conference on climate change legislation

When: 11 a.m., Thursday, Feb. 14

Where: SD-406, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing room

Hmmmm......Hooooray another new tax coming aren't you glad you voted for Obama?Read the full story here.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Power chief: Carbon credits face a ‘junk bond’ future.


Power chief: Carbon credits face a ‘junk bond’ future.(Euractive).Europe is staring at a ‘lost decade’ that will make decarbonisation impossible and reduce carbon credits to the value of ‘junk bonds’ unless politicians back a carbon market reform package, the head of Europe’s electricity industry association has told EurActiv.
Last week, MEP’s on the European parliament’s industry (ITRE) committee rejected a proposal to firm up carbon prices by withholding – or ‘backloading’ – 900 million EU allowances from the 2020 auctioning period.
Analysts expect a narrow majority for action in key votes on the parliament’s environment committee on 19 February and, crucially, in a plenary later this Spring.
But Hans ten Berge, secretary-general of Eurelectric, warned that “if we choose the strategy of a lost decade then we are going for a collapse of the carbon market and it will be impossible to achieve the 2050 decarbonisation targets.”
Carbon prices, which are supposed to entice low-carbon investments, plunged to a record low of just €2.81 per tonne after the ITRE committee vote, down from a peak of €32 in April 2006. But ten Berge said that the price could yet fall further.
“Just ask investors what the value is of a bond that you would not be able to cash before 2025,” he said. “I think that would be called a junk bond.Hmmmm....'There's one born every minute'.Read the full story here.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

The Carbon-Tax-Swap Fantasy.


The Carbon-Tax-Swap Fantasy.(Heritage).By Katie Tubb.To its credit, the Obama Administration has yet to endorse a carbon tax.
Such a tax is promised as the one-two punch that will put a significant dent in America’s fiscal crisis and the supposed impending doom from manmade global warming. This “market-based” approach will, supporters promise, bring new revenue to pay down the debt while reducing carbon dioxide emissions in a way that is less economically damaging than a cap-and-trade program.
But look past all the promises of revenue neutrality, and what do you find? A mess of bad assumptions and special interests.

Assumption #1: A carbon tax would reduce global warming. Regardless of what the truth is about manmade global warming or how fast the climate is warming or changing, a carbon tax would have a negligible effect on the global climate. Environmentalists are eager to point fingers at China when the solar industry fails to succeed even with federal subsidies, but they don’t seem to notice that any American carbon controls would have a miniscule impact on world temperatures—even if you believe the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s estimates.
Though Europe is bending over backwards to reduce its emissions—and paying for it economically—almost all of the projected increase in world carbon emissions comes from the developing world and is unaffected by carbon controls in the U.S. and Europe.

Assumption #2: Implementing a carbon tax would buck historical precedent and remain revenue neutral. It is clear that some special interests stand to benefit from a carbon tax, no matter how well intentioned. Many are already staking out a share of the new revenue for special interests—before the carbon tax has even reached the Senate and House floors.
Several politicians and think tanks have signaled their acceptance of a carbon tax in exchange for a reduction in corporate income taxes (which will never creep back up, right?) or in place of more burdensome environmental regulations (which the left will happily drop after so many years of work, right?). Sadly, even some conservatives are falling for this bait-and-switch.
Bad assumptions lead to bad policy that either addresses symptoms rather than causes or does not address the problem at all and in fact creates a new one. Even if the tax somehow remained revenue neutral, a carbon tax ignores the federal spending (not revenue) problem and would certainly increase energy prices and sock the economy.
America’s economy—from electricity and fuel to food, products, and services—depends on conventional energy, and when prices go up, the effects ripple throughout the entire economy. A carbon tax would add an unnecessary cost that would be passed on to consumers, no matter how creative Congress can be in mitigating the effects with compensation caveats. Americans don’t want to pay more for energy—regardless of which scientists they believe about global warming.
Fossil fuels may make a convenient punching bag for politicians. But government-induced higher energy prices are bound to come swinging back and hammer the economy—along with everyday Americans.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Obama May Levy Carbon Tax to Cut U.S. Deficit, HSBC Says.


Obama May Levy Carbon Tax to Cut U.S. Deficit, HSBC Says.(Bloomberg). By Mathew Carr.

Barack Obama may consider introducing a tax on carbon emissions to help cut the U.S. budget deficit after winning a second term as president, according to HSBC Holdings Plc.

A carbon tax starting at $20 a ton of carbon dioxide equivalent and rising at about 6 percent a year could raise $154 billion by 2021, Nick Robins, an analyst at the bank in London, said today in an e-mailed research note, citing Congressional Research Service estimates.
“Applied to the Congressional Budget Office’s 2012 baseline, this would halve the fiscal deficit by 2022,” Robins said.Read the full story here.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...