Carbon pricing doesn’t work

No surprises. It just doesn’t.

Some specific key findings from the study are:

Generally speaking, carbon taxes are easier to implement successfully than cap and trade plans.

Proponents of carbon pricing plans have often seen their proposals become unpopular, and paid a severe political price. For example, support for ambitious carbon pricing measures contributed to recent electoral defeats for congressional Democrats in the United States and the Liberal Party of Canada.

Opposition to carbon pricing plans often coalesces around the notion that these policies are a “revenue grab” by governments. This source of opposition can be softened somewhat, if policy proposals are clearly revenue neutral and include transparent revenue recycling mechanisms.

Even carbon pricing plans that are revenue neutral overall can cause significant harm to specific industries, groups and regions within a jurisdiction, leading to the development of fierce, concentrated political opposition that can result in policy reversal or block implementation altogether. If policy design ensures identifiable groups (such as low-income individuals) and regions that are likely to be harmed are compensated, the likelihood of fierce political opposition can be somewhat reduced.

So why do we have carbon pricing here?

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Smeagul

    Because carbon trading appears to be “doing something” about pollution and can be explained to Joe Bloggs as such, yet really it’s just another easy market for hungry traders to get their hands on.

    Only ACT and NZ First oppose carbon trading in NZ. Even the anti-corporate Greens have been sucked in to this because “it is better than doing nothing”.

  • devlsadvocate

    I’ve never understood the business and environmental logic behind carbon pricing anyway – if you have to pay for your emissions, you are therefore motivated to decrease your emissions and thus your expense, right?

    But then, in order to decrease your emissions, you need to invest in modern equipment, studies to change your operations, and audits to prove your carbon footprint – which requires money, money that you just spent on the bloody offsets!

    The dumbest idea ever was to turn it into a trading market – so when the price crashes, there’s no motivation to cut emissions, when the price surges it places financial pressure on producers who have no way of planning adequately for that, and overall volatility in that market will only add to volatility in financial markets, which is kind of a bad thing.

    So, agreeing with Smeagul, its another market for traders to jump into, make ‘money’ without producing, and fuck us all and now the environment too.

  • Patriot

    Carbon pricing — is that charging us for carbon .?

    What is the object of carbon pricing   ?
    Lower the temperature   ?
    Lower the co2 in the air    ?
    Lower the soot pollutants in the air  ?
    What is the co2 before and after carbon prices is paid + does it make more or less rain
    is co2 – that we breathe out , a pollutant  — NO
    Soot is a pollutant tho

    What is carbon pricing trying to achieve — fighting , so called manmade  ” Global warming ”   ?
    AGW is crap.

    The scientists dont know diddly squat + the science is not settled   

39%