EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Can Viable Carbon Tax Arise from the Senate’s Ashes?
And now, ve may begin?
Readers of a certain age, and a certain literary bent, will recognize the words of Alexander Portnoy's psychiatrist, spoken at the close of Philip Roth's transgressive 1969 novel, Portnoy's Complaint.
After lo these many years, they popped into my head last week as I read that Senate Democrats had finally thrown in the towel on an energy bill that would have included a partial cap-and-trade provision for limiting carbon emissions from power plants. The bill, written by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, was touted by Washington insiders and some major environmental groups as this year's last hope for federal climate legislation. Yet it would have relied on carbon offsets and other dodges to postpone the day of reckoning with true, visible carbon emissions pricing - the cornerstone of meaningful climate policy.
Instead, reported the New York Times, Senate Democrats will pursue a limited bill aimed at increasing oversight of oil drilling and tightening energy efficiency standards - with no direct assault on climate-destabilizing CO2. (For a later Times story amplifying the first, click here.)
Yes, now, we may begin - "we" being Americans who care about climate, sustainability, and Earth - to unite around a climate approach that is effective, equitable and transparent enough to win the support of our fellow citizens and a Congressional majority.
I'm referring of course to the idea advanced by climatologist Jim Hansen as fee-and-dividend and by the Carbon Tax Center as a revenue-neutral carbon tax, by which fossil fuel extractors and importers pay the U.S. Treasury fees pegged to the carbon content of the coal, oil and gas they take from the ground or bring into U.S. ports, and the Treasury distributes the revenues to all Americans via equal monthly dividends ("green checks"), or by tax-shifting from regressive taxes such as payroll taxes.
The Senate's antipathy to even the partial cap-and-trade proposed by Sen. Kerry will doubtless be spun as indicating that for the foreseeable future the well for climate legislation has been poisoned. The Carbon Tax Center says that the opposite may be true: with cap-and-trade out of the way at last, the political well can begin to be de-toxified so that the effective, equitable and transparent carbon fee-and-dividend can be seriously considered.
For this to happen, however, the Big Green groups like EDF and NRDC that for years have dominated climate discourse among environmentalists, and that convinced Congressional Democrats and the White House that the only way to "put a price on carbon" in America was via carbon cap-and-trade, will have to abandon that approach and allow others, and themselves, to try a fresh start.
It will be said that cap-and-trade failed because Fox News and other climate deniers branded it as "cap-and-tax" and, therefore, a carbon tax (or fee) cannot possibly succeed. And it is true that carbon cap-and-trade was looked to, years ago, as a way to build on the success of acid rain cap-and-trade, win over Republican free-marketers, and put a price on carbon without having to parade the dreaded t-a-x word before the public.
In the event, though, carbon cap-and-trade did none of these things.
Instead, Big Green's pursuit of carbon cap-and-trade tethered the climate movement to complex financial instruments and branded us as servants of Wall Street elites. It opened the legislative floodgates to off-the-charts Beltway deal-making that rightly repulsed the public. Perhaps most importantly, the co-optation of climate advocacy by the cap-and-traders robbed us of the high moral ground we might have shared with abolitionists, suffragists, labor agitators and civil rights workers - true American heroes who fought to liberate our society of oppression and injustice.
If you're in the climate movement, you recognize that fossil fuels' assault on Earth's climate is an ultimate form of oppression and injustice: of rich against poor, of the profligate against the frugal, of the present against the future. Ending this assault will require concerted action on many fronts; and it starts by internalizing the climate-damage costs of coal, oil and gas into their prices, so that the free ride for fossil fuels is ended and all of the alternatives, from energy efficiency, renewable energy and low-carbon fuels to conservation-based behavior and mindfulness toward energy consumption, may compete fairly and effectively.
Political action to accomplish this must be done in bright sunlight, not in Beltway shadows.
Cap-and-trade, let us hope, is dead. And now, we may begin!
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

20 Comments so far
Show AllCarbon Tax is the way to go.
The best carbon tax is to cut down government subsidizes to industries who leave the biggest carbon footprints in the first place:
1. Big Agri should lose its subsidies for 50 years of unsustainable factory farming practices that involve sucking up fossil fuels.
2. Big Auto should lose its subsidies for poor manufacturing and fuel inefficiency.
3. Big Pharma should either endorse natural medicines that require little or no fossil fuels to manufacture or be stripped of its subsidies.
4. Big Military must be defunded for being the biggest fossil fuel guzzler and ruining the lives of people both here and in the countries it wages its wars and occupations on.
5. Big Oil most of all should get no subsidies whatsoever for being the root cause of carbon hell.
Good-Good! and we all know none of this will happen. at best it'll be a program to build a few windmills. At worse it'll be a utility tax so high that the old and needy will freeze in their homes for lack of affording simple heating.
>^^<
Did you read the article where it said, "...the idea advanced by climatologist Jim Hansen as fee-and-dividend and by the Carbon Tax Center as a revenue-neutral carbon tax, by which fossil fuel extractors and importers pay the U.S. Treasury fees pegged to the carbon content of the coal, oil and gas they take from the ground or bring into U.S. ports, and the Treasury distributes the revenues to all Americans via equal monthly dividends ("green checks"), or by tax-shifting from regressive taxes such as payroll taxes."?
How would this "line the pockets of Bankers and Corporation"?
Thank you, ShadowDancer, I scream this same thing I'm a troll. But I know you've got Left-Cred,. Maybe they'll listen to you!
>^^<
Hear, hear! The carbon tax and revenue distribution rock!
As all revenue it will only be distributed amoungst the rich. The rest of us will suffer as always.
>^^<
re: "..If you're in the climate movement, you recognize that fossil fuels' assault on Earth's climate is an ultimate form of oppression and injustice: of rich against poor, of the profligate against the frugal, of the present against the future..."
Hmmm....
I've got good news and bad news for you:
Good news: "Anthropocentric Global Warming" or whatever it's called nowadays, is a steaming pile of unscientific...what's a good euphemism?...poo.
Bad news: In 20 years, you warmists/Kool-Aid drinkers are going to look back at this era and suffer major retroactive embarrassment.
I guess these comments make me a troll even though I'm a liberal. Keep your panties on, Tiredoftrolls. I won't annoy you any more.
99.9 percent of the scientific community agrees that a global climate disaster is being caused by CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. The other 0.1 percent has been paid off by Exxon, Koch, and BP.
BP is now trying to buy off scientists in the Gulf area who could potentially testify against them in oil spill civil suits.
C'mon if I want bald-faced lies, I'll switch over to Faux-News. 99% of humans agree on nothing, scientiests are no different!.
or to put it simply "pull the other one!" :)
>^^<
99.9 percent of scientists can't even agree on whether or not Pluto is a planet.
Besides, science is not about majority rule or show of hands. It didn't matter how many scientists used to think that the motions of the planets were controlled by epicycles. Kepler (one guy) came along and blew them all out of the water with 3 little equations.
Also, what difference does it make who funds anything? If the science is good, it's good. If it's bogus, it's bogus. It stands alone. It wouldn't surprise me if the sociopaths at BP would attempt to "buy off" some scientists for a pre-determined result, but that kind of "science" won't stand up to scrutiny, so let BP waste their money.
My wife and I just returned from a trip to China. We saw massive air pollution everywhere we went. We saw it in rural mountain areas, we saw it in Shanghi and worst of all in Bejing. Gone are the days went the chinese quaintly rode around on millions of bicycles. They drive millions of cars, cars lacking the pollution controls we enacted decades ago. We continue a trade policy that allows massive amount of goods to be imported from China, produced in carbon belching factories. We import these goods tariff free, while China triples the cost of american made goods with massive tariffs on those american goods. A pair of american made blue jeans that sells for $30 here, cost $100 there. A Ford car is produced in China. If the same car in imported from an american factory, it costs 3 times as much. "Free Trade" is a cruel lie. Yes, we need a carbon tax, but by itself, it will be self defeating if we don't fix our trade policy at the same time.
Yes. Hansons carbon tax must be accompanied with trade levies (tied to the 'carbon cost' of their production) on imported goods from countries that don't similarly conduct such taxes on carbon.
As an aside: $100 for a pair of blue jeans? People who pay that much deserve to get ripped off.
I have a strong indication that Kerry would like to do a cap and dividend bill.
It is up to all of us now to put pressure on Washington to pass a cap and dividend bill during this congress.
Seventy percent of the public will have a net increase in income with cap and dividend, so it should be an easy sell to them. With cap and dividend, most Americans will do well by doing good.
And those who reduce their fossil fuel use and switch to sustainable energy will do even better.
Cap-n-trade is a fraud -- a simulacrum of change designed to make folks feel good about themselves while they continue poluting. A straight forward carbon tax is the only way to go if we're indeed serious about collectively curbing our CO2 emissions.
Cap and dividend is a carbon tax that returns at least 75% of the tax equally to each US citizen as a dividend check. 70% of the public would have a net increase in income, and everyone would have incentive to reduce their use of fossil fuels, and avoid paying carbon taxes.
NASA's Hansen says we need to reduce CO2 to 350ppm, and he strongly supports cap and dividend as one of the best ways to get Americans to reduce fossil fuel use.
When you want less of something, just tax it. Go one step further and make the first 75K of income tax free, and replace the lost revenue with a stiff tax on carbon. Then stand back and watch how quickly Americans stop burning fossil fuels and start using sustainable energy.
There's a Wall St style ponzi-scheme if I've ever seen one! At a time when so many are out of work wondering how their gonna make it thru the winter this eco-rot comes at us like a 50s horror movie saying at the same time; Just let us tax you a little and we'll clean up the world for your children. The other side tries to convince us we (workers) won't pay for it the fatcats will. Well for the common American Worker I call Bull-Shit on that!
Only truly self-hating First-World spoiled children would even consider such foolishness. The rest of us who have worked, and worked hard for what little we have, and pray every night we can leave this much to our kids. We say no, we won't cut back we won't reduce, were bloody near to the bottom as it is. If you spoiled hemp-shirt wearing anti-western types who loveto advocate living in caves. Think you can talk the rest of us into joining you the answer will always be no!
>^^<