By: Carbon Tax Center » Carbon Tax Confusion

Carbon Tax Center » Carbon Tax Confusion — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 04:23:37 +0000

[...] by Charles Komanoff Carbon Tax Confusion at The Times & The Monitor (CTC) Filed under [...]

By: socialscientist

socialscientist — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 20:40:06 +0000

problems with carbon trading... http://www.sinkswatch.org/pubs/Durban%20DeclarationSeptember%202006%20leaflet.pdf "As representatives of people’s movements and independent organisations, we reject the claim that carbon trading will halt the climate crisis."

By: Dan Miner

Dan Miner — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:46:38 +0000

Charles, you're quite right in advocating for a national carbon tax, yet as your post notes, the political will to push for it doesn't yet exist. It's similar to what we face here in NYC, where congestion pricing is being fiercely resisted. Global warming response doesn't get enough of a buy-in, so the Bloomberg administration is focusing on quality of life and asthma reduction. As we've discussed, I think that we should also raise the real threat of fuel price and supply volatility to build motivation for congestion pricing, carbon taxes, and other sensible measures to reduce fossil fuel use. Besides its widely discussed benefits, congestion pricing is also an excellent and crucial energy security measure. Most of its critics and supporters implicitly assume that the price of gas will remain basically stable, but a growing number of observers, including military analysts and national security advocates, worry that even slight disruptions to our oil imports will cause abrupt price spikes to over $100 a barrel, leading gasoline and heating oil prices to rise to over $5 per gallon. Gasoline prices could rise suddenly for many reasons: an attack on Iran causing a blockade of the Straits of Hormuz, the shipping channel for over a third of the world’s oil, turmoil in Nigeria or Venezuela, terrorist attacks on oil shipping and refining infrastructure, or Gulf Coast hurricanes. Even without a crisis, the U.S. Government Accountability Office warns that depleting world oil supplies, combined with rising demand, will make energy markets increasingly volatile - and supply disruptions inevitable. Our addiction to oil and our growing dependence on imported fuel are dangerous security liabilities with severe economic consequences if the flow of foreign oil is disrupted. Now it’s not just environmentalists calling for massive increases in energy conservation and renewable energy – it’s the Council on Foreign Relations and the Army Corps of Engineers. A new Pentagon study warns that the military must take immediate steps toward running on alternative and renewable fuels or the US military's ability to respond to hot spots around the world will become "unsustainable in the long term". We can imagine what those Pentagon analysts might tell outer-borough commuters. How would a sharp spike in oil prices affect trucks bringing groceries to supermarkets? Winter heating fuel prices? The restaurants and theaters dependent on tourists? Fire, police, ambulances, and garbage trucks? Would commuters still choose to drive into Manhattan, or would they flock to mass transit?With the threat of price shocks and fuel shortages, efforts to shift our transit needs to less fuel-guzzling modes is as vital to our future as NYPD’s anti-terror task force. By getting more drivers out of cars and onto mass transit, congestion pricing increases our economic resiliency. Can it be reframed? Congestion pricing could be more accurately called the transit relief fund, the mass transit incentive, or the rush hour fee, according to Joe Brewer, research fellow at George Lakoff’s Rockridge Institute. It could also be called security pricing. While we need both short-term and long-term responses, the critical starting point of all energy policy should be rapid energy conservation planning. The newly released Sierra Club NYC report, “Moving New York City toward Sustainable Energy Independence” – available at www.beyondoilnyc.org - urges PlaNYC and City Council to follow San Francisco and Portland, Oregon, already creating municipal plans for energy volatility. Highway speed limits, reduced public transit fees, car pooling, telecommuting, and compressed work weeks of fewer but longer days are some responses recommended by the International Energy Agency and the engineering firm Parsons Brinkerhoff. Many of the issues raised by congestion pricing critics will enhance PlaNYC implementation as they are addressed, but opponents should consider future energy scenarios and connect the dots. With the matter reframed, perhaps they will join efforts to implement congestion pricing as a step in moving NYC toward better mass transit, and beyond oil. Dan Miner, Sierra Club NYC Group, energy committee chair “Moving NYC Toward Sustainable Energy Independence” has been endorsed by a number of groups, including New York Public Interest Research Group, INFORM, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, the Pace Energy Project and Sustainable South Bronx. It was cited as a Report of the Day by Gotham Gazette.

Comments on: Carbon Tax Confusion

By: Carbon Tax Center » Carbon Tax Confusion

By: socialscientist

By: Dan Miner