Sentences with phrase «about emissions taxes»

3) The third point, about emissions taxes or caps imposing heavy costs for no climate benefit, presumes that such limits won't spur innovation, efficiency and a shift to lower - emitting energy sources.

Not exact matches

Put another way, despite all the good things about B.C.'s carbon tax (and it got some laudatory words in the OECD report), it's barely stringent enough to fit into the IEA's 450ppm path and it's not likely to be stringent enough to see BC's emissions decrease between now and 2020 (see Table 17).

«Can I say to Australians the debate that they are hearing about a carbon tax is a debate about what Tony Abbott calls a carbon tax, which [it] will be for a limited period of time and then we will move to an emissions trading scheme.»

Many of the same warnings Mario Cuomo heard in the 1980s about Shoreham are the same ones his son hears today from supporters of Indian Point: Closing a nuclear plant will result in blackouts, a less reliable electric grid and increased air pollution as fossil fuels are burned to replace the lost emissions - free nuclear power; customers could face higher bills; more than 1,000 jobs will be lost, and tax revenue for schools and towns will dissipate.

I'll be speaking to the Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne, about whether there really is a pain - free way of cutting our carbon emissions - and whether innocent - sounding «green taxes» are really so inoffensive.

According to Nordhaus, small countries would not have to worry about achieving certain emissions levels, the system would be much less prone to corruption or cheating, and taxes, «while hated,» are a long - standing and «proven» financial instrument.

In response to a tax on greenhouse - gas emissions imposed by the Norwegian government, each year the company now removes about 1 million tons of CO2 captured as a waste product from the natural gas it recovers and pumps more than 99 percent of it 2,600 feet beneath the seafloor into a porous sandstone formation capped by impervious rock.

Rosenthal says that if carbon dioxide emissions become taxed in the future due to continuing concerns about global warming, his solar - driven catalyst for making synthetic fuel will compete even better economically with fossil fuels.

«The consequences of not [acting] are even higher with these results than they were before, when we could think about 1.5 degrees as being in the realm of possibility — which I think, realistically, it's not,» he said, urging more investments in research, a tax on carbon and other established paths to emissions reductions.

You'll also have to pay $ 895 for destination charges, and if you live in California, a $ 100 emissions tax just to sign on the dotted line — and that's before about $ 11,000 in safety and tech options that our example was equipped with, including the previously mentioned packages.

Choosing it adds about # 20,000 to the list price, while economy of 20.9 mpg and CO2 emissions of 315g / km (placing it in the top 37 % company - car tax band) mean it'll be more expensive to run than almost anything else on the road.

While the US is embroiled in an ongoing debate about how best to regulate auto emissions, Sweden went ahead and announced a plan today that will fiercely cut emissions, encourage people to buy hybrids, and generate tax revenue

Other climate and energy campaigners see far too weak a plan, with Charles Komanoff of the Carbon Tax Center making this trenchant observation about how recent progress on emissions (through the surprise shift from coal to gas and rise in energy efficiency) compares to the planned cuts:

Perhaps Flannery will explain how the carbon tax, which has a goal to reduce Australia's carbon emissions by about 4 per cent of China and India's increases in emissions over the same period, will help solve climate change.

Moving from theory to practice, however, has proven challenging, as the two leading approaches to pricing carbon, carbon taxes and cap - and - trade programs, only cover about 12 % of all carbon emissions globally today.

Been meaning to highlight Brad Plumer's post on a paper about the effect of a carbon tax on emissions (full paper here).

e360: You and others have spoken quite a bit about the importance of imposing a carbon tax as a way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and now we have a new administration coming in and a new Congress.

When asked about specific proposals to reduce climate change, most Democrats (90 %) and smaller majorities of Republicans (65 %) say that restrictions on power plant emissions would make a difference in reducing climate change, as would tax incentives encouraging businesses to reduce their carbon emissions (85 % and 65 %, respectively).

Three - quarters of U.S. adults (76 %) say corporate tax incentives to encourage carbon emission reductions among businesses can make a difference, and roughly seven - in - ten (71 %) say the same about tougher fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks.

Roughly two - thirds of covered emissions are covered by a cap - and - trade program, about one - third are covered by a carbon tax, and about one - quarter of the jurisdictions use both.

In the same vein, the choice of using a carbon tax over other possible tools to reduce emissions was a matter of judgment about political goals, he added.

In contrast, people with a «hierarchical» and «individualistic» mind - set respect leaders of industry and don't like government interfering in their affairs; they're apt to reject warnings about climate change, because they know what accepting them could lead to - some kind of tax or regulation to limit emissions.

There are reasons to worry about whether a carbon tax or cap - and - trade system would produce the emissions reductions we need quickly enough, and it is very plausible that additional measures like fuel taxes and efficiency requirements will be needed in addition.

In China, the government is also getting serious — revealing more details about its pilot emissions trading scheme, canvassing a flat carbon tax on certain industries, and also announcing that it would impose emission caps on certain provinces and cities, including the powerhouse economy of Guangdong, and the key commercial hubs of Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, Chongqing and Shenzhen, in preparation for the ETS.

Starting at $ 12.50 per metric ton of CO2 (equivalent to $ 11.34 per U.S. ton), the McDermott carbon tax would rise by that same amount each year to reach triple digits before the decade is out — a trajectory that would drive down U.S. emissions by about one third in that time, according to CTC's carbon tax model.

The main argument for a carbon tax rather than a trading scheme is that, if there is a lot of uncertainty about the cost of reducing emissions, and not much uncertainty about the damage caused by climate change, a fixed price for emissions (that is, a tax) will get closer to the optimal outcome than a fixed quantity.

New York is part of RGGI so there already is a tax (auction proceeds) on electrical generating unit CO2 emissions, there is a Climate Action Plan goal of an 80 % reduction of CO2 emissions from 1990 levels by 2050, and the State's draft Energy Plan is about to go public.

From the article: «The tax, which rose from 10 Canadian dollars per ton of carbon dioxide in 2008 to 30 dollars by 2012, the equivalent of about $ 22.20 in current United States dollars, reduced emissions by 5 to 15 percent with «negligible effects on aggregate economic performance,» according to a study last year by economists at Duke University and the University of Ottawa.»

The large majority of «environmental taxes» are raised from measures which either long pre-date concerns about emissions reduction, ie fuel duty, road tax, VAT or have nothing to do with reducing CO2 (landfill tax, aggregates levy).

For example the fuel tax escalator was introduced around 8 years ago, the renewables obligation on energy about the same and if you drive intro London the congestion charge has become the Emissions charge.

If they don't enact a stiff tax on carbon in 2021; and if they don't start using the full legal authority of the Clean Air Act to regulate all sources of carbon emissions — implementing what is in effect a carbon fuel rationing scheme — then they can be rightly accused of being totally dishonest and hypocritical in claiming to be concerned about the impacts of climate change.

But carbon pricing will be necessary to address the diverse economy - wide sources of CO2 emissions effectively and at sensible cost, whether the carbon pricing comes about through an economy - wide Federal cap - and - trade system or through a Federal carbon tax.

When the policy solution emphasized a tax on carbon emissions or some other form of government regulation, which is generally opposed by Republican ideology, only 22 percent of Republicans said they believed the temperatures would rise at least as much as indicated by the scientific statement they read.But when the proposed policy solution emphasized the free market, such as with innovative green technology, 55 percent of Republicans agreed with the scientific statement.For Democrats, the same experiment recorded no difference in their belief, regardless of the proposed solution to climate change.As study authors Troy Campbell and Aaron Kay wrote in the introduction to their paper about this study, this shows «not necessarily an aversion to the problem, per se, but an aversion to the solutions associated with the problem.»

«You have a Government that's silent about the fact that emissions in Australia go up, not down under the carbon tax,» he said.

The moralising stridency of so many arguments for cap - and - trade, carbon taxes, and global emissions treaties was founded on the idea that there is a consensus about how much warming there would be if carbon emissions continue on trend.

«They'll never talk about the fact that our emissions go up by 77 million tonnes between 2010 and 2020 under their carbon tax.»

«EPA's proposal for controlling greenhouse gas emissions from about half the nation's electric power supply is a poorly disguised cap - and - tax scheme that represents energy and economic policy at its worst,» Hal Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in a statement.

IMO their estimate of the taxes needed to accomplish this were very low (and discussant Paul Joskow pointed this out in his included remarks, noting that other people estimated these taxes as being 20 times bigger because they assumed that CO2 emissions would grow a lot faster without the tax), but for what it's worth they found a fairly small equivalent variation (loss) of about $ 250 billion (in 1990 dollars) for the U.S. in carrying out this policy.

As we learn more about the response of emissions to the price on carbon, we can raise or lower the tax or as we learn more about the maximum CO2 we can sustain in the atmosphere, we can raise or lower our cap.

Some speculate about a grand bargain in which carbon taxes replace carbon regulations — everything from the EPA's greenhouse gas emission standards to California's cap - and - trade program to State - level renewable electricity mandates.

Based on a real world «business as usual» emissions scenario, with natural gas displacing oil at its current pace and no carbon tax, I come up with a CO2 right about inline with RCP 6.0, «a mitigation scenario, meaning it includes explicit steps to combat greenhouse gas emissions (in this case, through a carbon tax) ``.

That's what two men named David thought, too, when they first met in 2008 to talk about a climate policy with very little support: a national tax on industrial carbon dioxide emissions.

Are cap - and - trade markets the best mechanism for bringing about large - scale carbon - dioxide emission reductions, or would a tax, or even straightforward regulation, be more effective or efficient?

Have you heard about a carbon tax (British Columbia and Australia) or cap and trade program (California)[Read more about carbon pricing], which could add a tax or fee onto your carbon emissions?

For example, a carbon tax designed to smoothly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions from their current level to zero by the year 2100 would result in only about 0.1 °C of global temperature «savings» — an amount, on its own, not worth pursuing.

And although he has to deal with internal squabbles about whether cap and trade or a carbon tax is the best way to bring down greenhouse gas emissions, at least the Obama team does agree on the goal.

Now, the case for replacing the bulk of the existing subsidies and regulations addressing greenhouse gas emissions with a carbon tax — our preferred policy response to climate change — is quite strong regardless of how one feels about the underlying science.

And of course, neither party will do anything about fuel taxes and emissions from the transportation sector.

Sure, tax cuts, grants and loans are fairly easy to account for, but what about military deployments to secure foreign oil supplies, or infrastructure costs like roads and transmission lines, or the seemingly endless stream of external costs linked to carbon emissions, toxic air and water pollutants, higher health care costs and missed work days?

Second, note that ETS only covers about half of emissions, and much of the rest (e.g., transportation) is covered by fossil fuel (carbon) taxes.