4 ms·

I wish we could just have a global carbon price instead of all these piecemeal judgements. Start it at $50/tonne, tariff anyone who doesn't apply it, and increa

I wish we could just have a global carbon price instead of all these piecemeal judgements. Start it at $50/tonne, tariff anyone who doesn't apply it, and increase it until global CO2 emissions reach a target level.

plantain 5y ago
Most of the world has a carbon price in some form now - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax#Implementation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax#Implementation Given the soaring cost of carbon in the EU, I think it won't be long before the EU heavily tariff's anyone trading with it without a similar policy
- DoingIsLearning 5y ago
  [0](Also) Most of the world maintains billions worth of oil and gas subsidies for Energy and Oil/Gas companies. These incentives effectively subsidize the operational costs of carbon emitting operations, they very directly make it cheaper to pollute. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidy
  - Leherenn 5y ago
    That doesn't seem to be most of the world according to your link, only the big energy-producing countries. There is a lack of differentiation between 0 and very low that makes is hard to be more definitive though.
  - roenxi 5y ago
    Although technically subsidies, they are typically just tax advantages. Corporate taxes in general are a bit counter-productive - taxes on energy-producing corporations apparently cross over into embarrassingly damaging to the point where most countries can't stomach it. It would be better to extend those 'subsidies' to every business rather than attempt to make energy more expensive.
- azalemeth 5y ago
  > Given the soaring cost of carbon in the EU, I think it won't be long before the EU heavily tariff's anyone trading with it without a similar policy This. We should be doing this already. The reason so many goods are made in East Asia, and then shipped to the EU, is because it's cheaper. The reason that it is cheaper is because there are costs for manufacturing in the EU that are not there in China. Those reduced costs frequently come down to: -- Weaker protections for the environment (i.e. polluting is cheaper than not) -- Reduced cost of labour (i.e. workers are not paid the same for doing the same job, and may be downright exploited or coerced into working -- c.f. Foxconn's scandals) -- Economies of scale. I would argue that this is a consequence of the other two.
Gravityloss 5y ago
There's always a better system on paper. The Kyoto protocol with quotas and CO2 trading was decided on 1997. It was modeled after the successful sulphur emissions trading, at the insistence of USA. And even with that, it's been hard to get it through internationally. So one way to actually cause delay and harm is to just always propose scrapping what's halfway built and go for the next system. Rio in 1992, Kyoto in 1997, Cancun 2010, Paris 2015 https://www.cfr.org/timeline/un-climate-talks https://www.cfr.org/timeline/un-climate-talks
- eru 5y ago
  Cap-and-trade has a lot of appeal from a mechanism design point of view. But I suspect that in practice it's harder to make work than a simple tax. In a perfect world, a tax can do everything that cap-and-trade can do and vice versa. They are basically dual approaches. 'Dual' in the linear programming sense of the word. On paper, it looks like cap-and-trade would be easier to make work. But in practice, politicians seem to like handing out permits for too cheap? A tax that generates revenue might be easier to get right? Perhaps a proper cap-and-trade system should auction off all permits every year, instead of handing them out to grand-fathered polluters?
  - throwaway346434 5y ago
    Its really not. Australia's carbon tax was simple, and worked. It only failed to take into account crony capitalism and ideological actors.
  - Gravityloss 5y ago
    You can go to zero-quota cap-and-trade. I tried to find easy to read information on how has it worked so far but I couldn't find anything on the right level. If there's a carbon trading expert here, I would really appreciate some layman appropriate (international law perspective) links.
jf___ 5y ago
in EU, its priced [1] at €52.83, that's $64.42/tonne note that the pricelevel was ~€20 a year ago... [1] https://ember-climate.org/data/carbon-price-viewer/ https://ember-climate.org/data/carbon-price-viewer/
pydry 5y ago
You don't try and decarbonize with the global world order that you'd like. You try and decarbonize with the global world order that you have. We probably would have a $50 carbon tax if we had a global world democracy that more or less represented the people. We probably wouldn't even need global warming activists.
Isinlor 5y ago
The EU already implemented Emissions Trading Scheme. EU is putting a cap on the emissions and the allowed emissions are auctioned, so that companies must compete for smaller and smaller pool of allowances. If companies do not reduce emissions there is no limit to how high taxation can go, as the tax rate is market driven with limited supply of allowances. China is planning to implement similar system. Only USA is doing nothing in this regard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_national_carbon_trading_scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_national_carbon_tradin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Tradin...

plantain 5y ago

Most of the world has a carbon price in some form now - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax#Implementation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax#Implementation Given the soaring cost of carbon in the EU, I think it won't be long before the EU heavily tariff's anyone trading with it without a similar policy

DoingIsLearning 5y ago
[0](Also) Most of the world maintains billions worth of oil and gas subsidies for Energy and Oil/Gas companies. These incentives effectively subsidize the operational costs of carbon emitting operations, they very directly make it cheaper to pollute. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidy
- Leherenn 5y ago
  That doesn't seem to be most of the world according to your link, only the big energy-producing countries. There is a lack of differentiation between 0 and very low that makes is hard to be more definitive though.
- roenxi 5y ago
  Although technically subsidies, they are typically just tax advantages. Corporate taxes in general are a bit counter-productive - taxes on energy-producing corporations apparently cross over into embarrassingly damaging to the point where most countries can't stomach it. It would be better to extend those 'subsidies' to every business rather than attempt to make energy more expensive.
azalemeth 5y ago
> Given the soaring cost of carbon in the EU, I think it won't be long before the EU heavily tariff's anyone trading with it without a similar policy This. We should be doing this already. The reason so many goods are made in East Asia, and then shipped to the EU, is because it's cheaper. The reason that it is cheaper is because there are costs for manufacturing in the EU that are not there in China. Those reduced costs frequently come down to: -- Weaker protections for the environment (i.e. polluting is cheaper than not) -- Reduced cost of labour (i.e. workers are not paid the same for doing the same job, and may be downright exploited or coerced into working -- c.f. Foxconn's scandals) -- Economies of scale. I would argue that this is a consequence of the other two.

Gravityloss 5y ago

There's always a better system on paper. The Kyoto protocol with quotas and CO2 trading was decided on 1997. It was modeled after the successful sulphur emissions trading, at the insistence of USA. And even with that, it's been hard to get it through internationally. So one way to actually cause delay and harm is to just always propose scrapping what's halfway built and go for the next system. Rio in 1992, Kyoto in 1997, Cancun 2010, Paris 2015 https://www.cfr.org/timeline/un-climate-talks https://www.cfr.org/timeline/un-climate-talks

eru 5y ago
Cap-and-trade has a lot of appeal from a mechanism design point of view. But I suspect that in practice it's harder to make work than a simple tax. In a perfect world, a tax can do everything that cap-and-trade can do and vice versa. They are basically dual approaches. 'Dual' in the linear programming sense of the word. On paper, it looks like cap-and-trade would be easier to make work. But in practice, politicians seem to like handing out permits for too cheap? A tax that generates revenue might be easier to get right? Perhaps a proper cap-and-trade system should auction off all permits every year, instead of handing them out to grand-fathered polluters?
- throwaway346434 5y ago
  Its really not. Australia's carbon tax was simple, and worked. It only failed to take into account crony capitalism and ideological actors.
- Gravityloss 5y ago
  You can go to zero-quota cap-and-trade. I tried to find easy to read information on how has it worked so far but I couldn't find anything on the right level. If there's a carbon trading expert here, I would really appreciate some layman appropriate (international law perspective) links.

jf___ 5y ago

in EU, its priced [1] at €52.83, that's $64.42/tonne note that the pricelevel was ~€20 a year ago... [1] https://ember-climate.org/data/carbon-price-viewer/ https://ember-climate.org/data/carbon-price-viewer/

pydry 5y ago

You don't try and decarbonize with the global world order that you'd like. You try and decarbonize with the global world order that you have. We probably would have a $50 carbon tax if we had a global world democracy that more or less represented the people. We probably wouldn't even need global warming activists.

Isinlor 5y ago

The EU already implemented Emissions Trading Scheme. EU is putting a cap on the emissions and the allowed emissions are auctioned, so that companies must compete for smaller and smaller pool of allowances. If companies do not reduce emissions there is no limit to how high taxation can go, as the tax rate is market driven with limited supply of allowances. China is planning to implement similar system. Only USA is doing nothing in this regard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_national_carbon_trading_scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_national_carbon_tradin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Tradin...