The post below was intended to be a comment on a Tom Friedman column in the New York Times on 03-17-13. Comments were closed before it was finished and it was not submitted. I am posting it here to generate comments and to be ready when next needed.
For related posts click on “climate-energy” in the header bar or on the tag “carbon-fee” in the tag cluster.
For the Friedman column go to column. The post is below.
Bill Allen, 04-10-13
Tom:
I know that you and others have advocated a carbon tax for many years and I fully agree with your objectives and arguments. I believe, however, that a carbon tax is a bridge-too-far today, and that what James Hansen calls a “carbon fee and dividend” is an excellent and practical alternative. Principal features follow.
(1) The fee will be collected at the source of the fossil fuel: mine, well, or port of entry. Except for a small administrative cost, all revenue will be divided and distributed to the people.
(2) Because no revenue will be retained by the government, the fee will not be a tax. Opponents will try to label it as one, but they will be wrong.
(3) People with low income spend less overall than those with high income, so the amount of their spending that results from the carbon fee will be less than that for high income people. Both low and high income people will receive the same dividends. This is fair because everyone has an equal stake in our environmental future.
(4) The fee will start low and increase each year by a set amount. This will continue for at least ten years or until some predetermined goal of fossil fuel reduction is met. There will be a common basis for everyone to plan and act to reduce fossil fuel use.
(5) Everyone will have incentive to buy less fossil fuel and products and services dependent upon fossil fuel. Business and government will have incentive to help them. Examples: Consumers will want more fuel efficient cars and manufacturers will make them. There will be demand for more energy efficient buildings and builders will construct them. There will be demand for alternate energy sources and inventors, entrepreneurs, and investors will provide them. Governments will sponsor more mass transit, and planners will lay out more friendly communities for walking and biking.
(6) These billions of decisions will be made almost always by private persons, not by government.
(7) Domestic manufacturers will receive credits for exports that compensate for the carbon fee content of exported products, and fees will be imposed on imports that reflect the carbon content of imported products. These fees will be waived if a trading partner implements a comparable carbon fee in his economy.
There will be two important outcomes.
(1) Fossil fuel use will decline over the long term. My goal is to get completely off fossil fuel by 2050. I call this “OFF by 2050” or alternatively “OFFby2050”.
(2) The US will become the world leader in conservation and the use of alternative energy. Economic and political leadership will follow.
When understood, this program will be supported by a broad spectrum of the American people. I urge you to promote it.
Bill Allen, 03-17-13 <> OFFby2050