The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > What carbon price is right to bite into, not bark at, climate change? > Comments

What carbon price is right to bite into, not bark at, climate change? : Comments

By Ted Christie, published 3/2/2012

Twenty-one dollars a tonne is too timid a carbon price to make any impact

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. Page 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All
It's ridiculous complaining about the level of carbon tax as if it was pegged to the severity of the problem. The carbon tax is a nominal response to the science that says we have a dire problem, but it's pegged to political and economic considerations rather than the science. The international community is engaged in a protracted game of diplomatic brinkmanship over climate change and its fallout, on the one had. On the other hand countries like Australia are trying to to reconcile the need for cuts to carbon emissions with an addiction to economic growth--a union that will never work.
The author is absolutely correct that the carbon tax needs to be much higher to be effective, but that means both political and economic suicide and the remedy (depression) is deemed worse than the terminal disease.
The carbon tax is a crock at any price because it's predicated on economic growth, and proposed cuts in both emissions and growth are non sequitur.
It crosses the border of idiocy therefore to lobby for a high carbon tax as if there were no other factors to the equation and no good reason not to swallow the pill.
For once we can't buy ourselves out of difficulty, or profit by it, which is the extent of the current "thinking" on the matter. But however admirable, swallowing a cup of economic hemlock won't do anything either, except kill inspirational naivity.
Posted by Squeers, Sunday, 5 February 2012 3:03:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The carbon tax is a necessity so people will bye renewable power. The price is right , and will increase as time passes. Change is inevitable, and without penalties it will not happen. A carbon price is the only option we have. This will turn investment into renewable power.
Posted by 579, Sunday, 5 February 2012 4:07:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579,
I support the urgent need for action on climate change, but this means cutting consumption and economic growth, not increasing and taxing it (and we can only tax growth).
It's not only about so-called renewable power--which still takes enormous and polluting infrastructure to put in place, as well as being comparatively inefficient--but also about reducing demand to a point that is truly renewable and sustainable. Do the math; we can't solve the problem of emissions and continue business as usual. Economic growth and its material by-production is the problem, and it cannot be harnessed to compensate for the fact that economic growth entails material growth, which entails polluting emissions. We can only tax growth, and not recession; but we can't grow without exacerbating the problem we're looking to address by taxing growth.
I can't put it any more laboriously. If I'm wrong, tell me how we can grow economically, and tax it, without growing materially? Or how we can grow materially without the twin evils of entropy and carbon as by-product?
We need renewable energy "and" drastic cuts in consumption, and the prevailing economic system, reliant on growth and profit, cannot pull off that kind of alchemy.
"Change is inevitable, and without penalties it will not happen. A carbon price is the only option we have. This will turn investment into renewable power".
You're not talking about "change", which I'm all for; you're talking about a business as usual approach that can't work because it's the very problem it's supposed to address.
Posted by Squeers, Sunday, 5 February 2012 5:19:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2093264/Forget-global-warming--Cycle-25-need-worry-NASA-scientists-right-Thames-freezing-again.html

"The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997."

(I've not been able to find the mentioned reports but did find a number of references to them in different locations

and

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_News_BlogsModule

I'm quite confident that portions of the warming case are creations of an anti-progress extremist element (as are parts of the anti-warming case are tied to extremists in other directions).

It's clear that the evidence for dangerous AGW is not as certain as many claim.

In one direction we gamble with rising temperatures (and flow on impacts), on the other hand if attempts to address the risk send the world into economic stagnation we may blow our best opportunity to use our current wealth to set up for the future.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Sunday, 5 February 2012 6:52:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579

'The carbon tax is a necessity so people will bye renewable power.'

Renewable energy won't help the 200 plus who have died in Europe over the last couple of weeks because of freezing conditions. gw is a huge scam.
Posted by runner, Sunday, 5 February 2012 7:38:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For those that don't follow links an except from the second link

"Speaking for many scientists and engineers who have looked carefully and independently at the science of climate, we have a message to any candidate for public office: There is no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to "decarbonize" the world's economy. Even if one accepts the inflated climate forecasts of the IPCC, aggressive greenhouse-gas control policies are not justified economically.

A recent study of a wide variety of policy options by Yale economist William Nordhaus showed that nearly the highest benefit-to-cost ratio is achieved for a policy that allows 50 more years of economic growth unimpeded by greenhouse gas controls. This would be especially beneficial to the less-developed parts of the world that would like to share some of the same advantages of material well-being, health and life expectancy that the fully developed parts of the world enjoy now. Many other policy responses would have a negative return on investment. And it is likely that more CO2 and the modest warming that may come with it will be an overall benefit to the planet."

16 concerned scientists and engineers may not be a big list numerically but those on the list are worth paying attention to even if after consideration you choose to disagree.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Sunday, 5 February 2012 7:39:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. Page 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy