# 7 Carbon tax becomes more popular

 Here is a frightening statement made last year:

“Greenhouse gas emissions are set for another rise in 2012. According to a Global Carbon Project, the greenhouse gas emissions will reach a record high of 35.6 billion tonnes at the end of 2012, accounting for a 2.6% increase when compared to previous year. This is yet another clear indicator that world leaders are pretty much useless when it comes to climate change - namely plenty of false promises and very little real-time action. The numbers for greenhouse gas emissions are 58% above 1990 levels, and the world looks to be heading straight ahead to an environmental disaster of massive proportions, the one that will likely make life very difficult for our future generations.”(CT63)

Fortunately responsible multinationals, including oil companies want a carbon tax  and state as follows:

“And, in a clear signal that global business is becoming frustrated by the lack of political action in the UN climate talks, support for a global carbon price came on Monday from 100 multinationals including Shell, Unilever, Cathay Pacific, EDF Energy, Braskem, Statoil, Swiss Re, Ricoh and Skanska.

The companies have called on governments to introduce a price to "drive the investment" needed to deliver substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. "A price on CO2 can open the door to increased ambition. Putting a clear, transparent and unambiguous price on carbon must be a core policy objective," said the companies who signed up to a declaration by the Carbon Price Communiqué, an initiative co-ordinated by the Prince of Wales's corporate leaders group on climate change.”( CT17)

The http://www.carbontax.org/ has this to say

Pro-carbon tax sentiment has grown so widespread that we have subdivided this page into categories:

Public Officials

Scientists and Economists

Opinion Leaders (Environmental, Business, Religious)

Editorial Positions (editorials expressing corporate rather than personal opinion)

Authors/Writers/Pundits, including Newspaper Columnists

Conservatives (CT64. 65)

I was interested in what the business people had to say, skimmed their statements and all prefer carbon tax over cap and trade. These people have some influence as can be seen from their positions:

Rex Tillerson, CEO, ExxonMobil 

Dan Reicher, director of climate change and energy initiatives, Google.org,

Donald E. Felsinger, Chairman and CEO, Sempra Energy,

Jim Gordon, CEO, Energy Management, Inc.

Bruce Williamson, CEO, Dynegy,

Robert Olsen, Chairman, ExxonMobil International Ltd.

Lewis Hay III, Chief Executive of FPL Group:

Paul Anderson, former Chairman and CEO, Duke Energy

T. Boone Pickens, oil and gas industry leader and philanthropist

Glenn Cannon, former General Manager, Waverly Light and Power, and Past Chair of the American Public Power Association  (CT 65-68)

Let’s hope that these industry leaders can convince the politicians

Many people oppose the carbon tax because the internet is flooded with articles stating how much extra the average family pays for gasoline and home heating. Little attention is given to the fact that most proposals and the existing carbon tax in British Columbia refund most or all of the money collected via reduced income taxes and special grants for businesses, public utilities and individual taxpayers. This leads to very misleading figures. The Americans are told that one of their proposals will cost the average family $1500 per year, while it is in fact only $ 150 per year. Canadians are told that, due to the carbon tax, the average British Columbian household loses $779 of their annual income while it is in fact around $ 0. The details showing how this all happened can be found under points 4 and 5 of the second article in post 1

Carbon tax is much easier to implement and administer than cap and trade. In the Australian debate 6 specific reasons were mentioned, (see point 5 in the second article of post 1). The revenue neutral carbon tax implemented in British Columbia, Canada is referred to in the US and Britain as a perfect example about how to proceed. A global agreement, which includes tax on exported oil, coal and natural gas will however also be required. Without such agreement we will keep exporting cheap untaxed oil to China and retard their efforts in developing Carbon Caption and Storage and wind energy (see point 3 in the first article of post 1). Taxing exports would also greatly benefit the coal producers in Australia who at the moment are again bitterly complaining. Under a revenue neutral system they would be refunded for the extra money they pay for their emissions. A global agreement has to include transfer of some of the tax proceeds to countries which have no taxable carbon but have to live with higher energy costs and effects of climate change. This is a stumbling block because countries all have different ideas as can be seen from one of the points in my 12 February E mail to the Canadian Government:

“I also noted that Canada would no longer advance further amounts to the Green Energy Fund until a new climate change convention is in place. That would be 2015 at the earliest. After finding out what type of fund it is (EP19), I was looking for a headline from our government showing how much we have contributed so far, how much extra was suggested and how our contributions compare to that of other countries. No such statement springs forward. I did find out that Norway proposed  to nearly double its carbon tax on offshore oil companies and fishing fleets, allowing it to plough an extra £1bn into its funds for climate change mitigation, renewable energy, food security in developing countries and conversion to low-carbon energy sources.(EP17). That sounds similar to making contributions to the Green Energy Fund”

I finish with more good news, which is not widely reported. While 10 Eastern US states have a successful and profitable carbon pricing system (see point 2 in the second article of post 1 ), the Western States are now ready to adapt the British Columbia Carbon tax see the 29 Oct article in http://business.financialpost.com/2013/10/29/b-c-reaches-carbon-pricing-deal-with-oregon-washington-states/?__lsa=d9c1-179f

Here are some of the highlights:

VICTORIA — British Columbia’s carbon tax will soon have two new American cousins, prompting Environment Minister Mary Polak to suggest B.C.’s groundbreaking tax is helping fuel an expanding green-powered West Coast economic juggernaut.

Polak, who was in San Francisco, said the carbon-pricing agreement follows a meeting of the Pacific Coast Collaborative, which includes California, Alaska, Oregon, Washington and B.C. The four states and one province have a combined population of 53 million people, with a gross domestic product of $2.8-trillion.

Polak said B.C.’s 2008 carbon tax played an instrumental role in convincing the U.S. states to embrace carbon pricing similar to B.C.’s carbon tax.

Earlier this year, California introduced a carbon pricing mechanism as part of its carbon cap-and-trade system.

“California isn’t waiting for the rest of the world before it takes action on climate change,” California Gov. Jerry Brown said in a statement. “Today, California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia are all joining together to reduce greenhouse gases,” Brown said.