4 ms·

It's not really accomplished unless the gas tax pulls that CO2 back down from the atmosphere.

by zardo 5y ago

BizarroLand 5y ago
Per the CDC, A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. The weighted average price per ton for carbon credits from forestry and land-use projects that reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere has been on a steady upward path, rising from $4.33 per credit in 2019 to $4.73 per credit so far in 2021, with a spike to $5.60 per credit in 2020. So, spend $35/year or if you want to get fancy, the cost of 1 tank of gas per year to offset your carbon footprint from driving and enjoy a guilt-free year. Or we could fold that cost into gas, if you use 1 tank a week, 10/gallons a tank, that would be less than $0.02 as a carbon tax credit. I would be all for that. But, if you raised the price of gas $0.50 and funneled all of that money into funding carbon capture industries, I would also be all for that, and at that price point more people would search for public transportation or purchase EV's so that is a double win. But then again, these taxes would disproportionately affect the middle and lower classes in suburban and rural communities so that would make life far more difficult on people who already have it tough enough and manufacturers would probably shovel any taxes you put on them directly to the consumers as well, so I would say it's almost as if there isn't a single simple fix to the issue and only a multipronged approach that takes into account dozens of moving variables rolled out over time is the only viable solution.
29083011397778 5y ago
That closes the loop, for sure. But doesn't a carbon tax address your exact complaint, in that externalities should be internalised? It takes the externality (CO2 is bad because global warming) and makes it a cost for the person performing the activity (CO2 is bad because gas is expensive, and useage is therefore to be limited).
- zardo 5y ago
  The cost of the pollution is it's effect on the environment and everyone living in it. Just collecting taxes does not address that. The tax would have to actually undue the pollution to eliminate the externality.
  - kortilla 5y ago
    Then driving a Prius doesn’t accomplish anything either.
    - zardo 5y ago
      Driving a Prius for fun on the weekends is less damaging than driving a Viper. You might not get as much fun done though.
eru 5y ago
A pigovian tax works, even if the proceeds are not used to fight the externalities. Pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere might or might not be a good idea. But that's a cost/benefit analysis that's independent of the carbon tax take.

It's not really accomplished unless the gas tax pulls that CO2 back down from the atmosphere.

by zardo 5y ago

It's not really accomplished unless the gas tax pulls that CO2 back down from the atmosphere.

Per the CDC, A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. The weighted average price per ton for carbon credits from forestry and land-use projects that reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere has been on a steady upward path, rising from $4.33 per credit in 2019 to $4.73 per credit so far in 2021, with a spike to $5.60 per credit in 2020. So, spend $35/year or if you want to get fancy, the cost of 1 tank of gas per year to offset your carbon footprint from driving and enjoy a guilt-free year. Or we could fold that cost into gas, if you use 1 tank a week, 10/gallons a tank, that would be less than $0.02 as a carbon tax credit. I would be all for that. But, if you raised the price of gas $0.50 and funneled all of that money into funding carbon capture industries, I would also be all for that, and at that price point more people would search for public transportation or purchase EV's so that is a double win. But then again, these taxes would disproportionately affect the middle and lower classes in suburban and rural communities so that would make life far more difficult on people who already have it tough enough and manufacturers would probably shovel any taxes you put on them directly to the consumers as well, so I would say it's almost as if there isn't a single simple fix to the issue and only a multipronged approach that takes into account dozens of moving variables rolled out over time is the only viable solution.

29083011397778 5y ago

That closes the loop, for sure. But doesn't a carbon tax address your exact complaint, in that externalities should be internalised? It takes the externality (CO2 is bad because global warming) and makes it a cost for the person performing the activity (CO2 is bad because gas is expensive, and useage is therefore to be limited).

zardo 5y ago
The cost of the pollution is it's effect on the environment and everyone living in it. Just collecting taxes does not address that. The tax would have to actually undue the pollution to eliminate the externality.
- kortilla 5y ago
  Then driving a Prius doesn’t accomplish anything either.
  - zardo 5y ago
    Driving a Prius for fun on the weekends is less damaging than driving a Viper. You might not get as much fun done though.

eru 5y ago

A pigovian tax works, even if the proceeds are not used to fight the externalities. Pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere might or might not be a good idea. But that's a cost/benefit analysis that's independent of the carbon tax take.