4 ms·

I mean, a $15/tonne carbon(dioxide) tax would raise the cost of a 20lb bag of charcoal by $0.50, or about 3% based on a quick search. So the BBQing itself is p

I mean, a $15/tonne carbon(dioxide) tax would raise the cost of a 20lb bag of charcoal by $0.50, or about 3% based on a quick search. So the BBQing itself is probably not prohibitively expensive. The price of the beef burgers would go up by 7% according to Beef Magazine, 150% according to vegnews.com, and 40% according to NY Times.

dane-pgp 4y ago
For context, here's a news article from March of this year: "The biggest food price hikes are in meats, with pork and beef up 14% to 20% compared with a year ago." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meat-prices-pandemic-inflation-corporate-greed/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meat-prices-pandemic-inflation-...
bryanlarsen 4y ago
Charcoal is carbon neutral, it's simply releasing the CO2 absorbed from the atmosphere by the trees that made the charcoal. So there shouldn't be a carbon tax on charcoal.
- gumby 4y ago
  The production of charcoal itself emits a lot of CO2
  - hedora 4y ago
    Source? Isn't it basically the same process as biochar, which has been proposed as a carbon capture technology (the idea being that you bury the resulting charcoal instead of burning it)?
    - gumby 4y ago
      Yes, as far as I can tell the footprint of pyrolysis portion is basically the same (various wild seeming claims notwithstanding) though I haven't dug into this deeply, and specifically haven't looked into it in over a decade. However on a full cycle basis the difference is biochar is typically made from local material (mostly the leftover waste from the prior year's harvest) which is right there (zero transport) and would otherwise rot and release methane and CO2 on its own, even if plowed into the field. Charcoal is made from trees, typically cut down and transported to a factory and then transported to the customer. In general I am not in favor of burning trees, enjoyable as it is on a cold night out in the forest.

dane-pgp 4y ago

For context, here's a news article from March of this year: "The biggest food price hikes are in meats, with pork and beef up 14% to 20% compared with a year ago." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meat-prices-pandemic-inflation-corporate-greed/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meat-prices-pandemic-inflation-...

bryanlarsen 4y ago

Charcoal is carbon neutral, it's simply releasing the CO2 absorbed from the atmosphere by the trees that made the charcoal. So there shouldn't be a carbon tax on charcoal.

gumby 4y ago
The production of charcoal itself emits a lot of CO2
- hedora 4y ago
  Source? Isn't it basically the same process as biochar, which has been proposed as a carbon capture technology (the idea being that you bury the resulting charcoal instead of burning it)?
  - gumby 4y ago
    Yes, as far as I can tell the footprint of pyrolysis portion is basically the same (various wild seeming claims notwithstanding) though I haven't dug into this deeply, and specifically haven't looked into it in over a decade. However on a full cycle basis the difference is biochar is typically made from local material (mostly the leftover waste from the prior year's harvest) which is right there (zero transport) and would otherwise rot and release methane and CO2 on its own, even if plowed into the field. Charcoal is made from trees, typically cut down and transported to a factory and then transported to the customer. In general I am not in favor of burning trees, enjoyable as it is on a cold night out in the forest.