and not subjected to “Cap-and-Trade” quotas!
Why? Because “carbon taxes” might actually work!
So, when world leders gather in Copenhagen, Doha or Kyoto they should not discuss and agree what emissions should be in 2020 or 2030, but instead agree upon what the global tax on greenhouse gas emissions (“Carbon tax” in short) should be, and how it should rise.
A steadily rising global tax rate
The tax should be set relatively low to begin with, but with a steady rise that is agreed 5-10 years into the future. When emissions of climate gases start dropping significantly the tax should be frozen at the level it is at that time.
Chinese carbon dioxide emissions are rising fast – do you believe it’ll be easier to get them to pay a big chunk of their forex reserves buying quotas from western countries rather than paying a CO2 tax to their own government?
The tax should be collected by the government in the country where the emissions will take place, and in most cases immediately returned to the citizens in the form of tax reductions coupled to the carbon tax take.
The effect of such a tax will be that it gets progressively more expensive to emit climate
altering gases, making alternatives steadily more attractive.
Carbon taxes avoids the drawbacks of Cap’n trade, regulations or subsidies
A globally uniform tax on greenhouse gas emissions would avoid many of the problems caused by alternative methods. For instance, a uniform cost of emitting greenhouse gases would avoid the worry of business about losing competitiveness to overseas locations with lower energy costs.
For a list of reasons why carbon taxes beat other methods for controlling reductions go on to The flaws of regulations, subsidies and cap’n trade