Economists on the left and right agree that putting
a fee on carbon pollution is the most cost - effective way to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The best approach would be to use a market mechanism such as the sale of carbon allowances or
a fee on carbon pollution to lower emissions and increase revenue.
The proposed «Climate and Community Reinvestment Act» would place
a fee on carbon pollution in the District and rebate the large majority of revenue raised back to D.C. residents.
The proposed carbon fee - and - rebate policy would place
a fee on carbon pollution in the District and rebate a majority of revenue raised back to D.C. residents.
Former GOP Reps. Sherwood Boehlert and Wayne Gilchrest wrote in a 2012 op - ed that
a fee on carbon pollution could «raise $ 200 billion or more over 10 years and trillions of dollars by 2050 while cutting carbon emissions by 17 percent by 2020.»
Not exact matches
At 7 p.m. People of Albany United for Safe Energy sponsors a forum
on putting a price
on climate change through a
carbon tax or
fee to make polluters pay for the air
pollution they emit, First Unitarian Universalist Church, 405 Washington Ave., Albany.
When it comes to tackling climate change, President Barack Obama once had grand ambitions, including forging a global deal
on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and persuading Congress to enact legislation that would impose
fees on U.S.
carbon pollution.
The revenue could come either from auctioning
pollution permits, a «wires
fee»
on electricity use, a modest tax
on carbon, or a mix of all three.
With a
carbon fee - and - rebate policy called the Climate and Community Reinvestment Act of D.C., companies that buy and sell fossil fuels in the District would pay a steadily - rising
fee on each ton of heat - trapping
pollution they cause.