A Republican's push for a carbon tax

[bripat9643]

We need to outsource our progressives maybe to perfect carbon footprint north Korea

If you set a good example at home, it's a lot easier to negotiate and change abroad.

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD

Khum Buy Yah!

 

[Trakar]

How big of a tax would this need to be to make solar=to natural gas and coal?

The calculation is a bit more complex than this, particularly as economic impact, transitional accomodation and the need to simultaneously eliminate the naturally regressive nature of such taxes and to insure that over the life of the program it remains a revenue neutral are all concerns that need to be coordinated to produce a tax that helps to facillitate our nation's efficient and effective shift away from being a fossil-fuelled economy.

The carbon component of all fossil fuels, from anthracite to heavy oil to natural gas, is very precisely known. Likewise, the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere when the fuel is burned has been very accurately measured and calculated. Per unit of energy (or Btu), natural gas emits the least CO2 of any fossil fuel when burned, and coal the most, with petroleum (oil) products such as gasoline occupying the middle range. Generally, a Btu from coal produces 30% more carbon dioxide than a Btu from oil, and 80% more than from natural gas. A carbon tax would obey these proportions, taxing coal somewhat more heavily than petroleum products, and much more than natural gas. A carbon tax should be revenue-neutral. Revenue-neutral means that little if any of the tax revenues raised by taxing carbon emissions would be retained by government. The vast majority of the revenues would be returned to the public, with, perhaps, a very small amount utilized to mitigate the otherwise negative impacts of carbon taxes on low-income energy users.

Ultimately, we're probably looking at a carbon tax that would (in my considerations) top out at around $100/ton of carbon which would break down to about $1 a gallon for gasoline, around $35 a ton for coal (depending on the grade of coal), and in the neighborhood of $0.00066/cu ft for natural gas ($0.0066 per KWh). But, it would be extremely unwise to implement this level immediately, rather the tax would be gradually phased in. Probably starting out at around $45/ton of carbon for 6 years, $80/ton for the next 6 years and then finally $100/ton for the remainder of the 30 year lifespan of the tax, at the end of this period a congressional review will decide whether to initiate phase out or extend the tax based upon the tax's efficacy at transitioning the economy off of fossil fuels.

 

[Trakar]

You should stop posting on the Internet. You use electricity to run your computer and servers, using up "fossil fuels" hence you are melting the ice caps by posting your dire "AGW is fo'shizzle!" warning.

For the love of Gaia, get off the Internet!

My personal energy is suppied renewably, our local power is primarily hydro, the mirroring of the site-frames into other nodes around the region, nation and planet are going to happen whether or not I post. I am in good stead with my conscience, how about you? What share of you local power is not generated from coal or oil? Have you just tried to pay the % of your bills that come from using coal and oil to keep from rewarding people for producing renewable energy? If not, why not?

Not, because your "Science" is a fraud worse than Piltdown Man and far more obvious too. I live for the day when real scientist at colleges and Universities boot you lying fuckers to the curb for disparaging their institutions

We get 25% of our power from nuclear and the house run on gas so we're all good here.

So you are perfectly happy to take personal advantage of low carbon technologies, you just don't want to encourage others to follow your example?

 

[daveman]

My personal energy is suppied renewably, our local power is primarily hydro, the mirroring of the site-frames into other nodes around the region, nation and planet are going to happen whether or not I post. I am in good stead with my conscience, how about you? What share of you local power is not generated from coal or oil? Have you just tried to pay the % of your bills that come from using coal and oil to keep from rewarding people for producing renewable energy? If not, why not?

Not, because your "Science" is a fraud worse than Piltdown Man and far more obvious too. I live for the day when real scientist at colleges and Universities boot you lying fuckers to the curb for disparaging their institutions

We get 25% of our power from nuclear and the house run on gas so we're all good here.

So you are perfectly happy to take personal advantage of low carbon technologies, you just don't want to encourage others to follow your example?

Most of the left follows the Al Gore model: Continue doing as always, and demand OTHERS change.

 

[Trakar]

Not, because your "Science" is a fraud worse than Piltdown Man and far more obvious too. I live for the day when real scientist at colleges and Universities boot you lying fuckers to the curb for disparaging their institutions

We get 25% of our power from nuclear and the house run on gas so we're all good here.

So you are perfectly happy to take personal advantage of low carbon technologies, you just don't want to encourage others to follow your example?

Most of the left follows the Al Gore model: Continue doing as always, and demand OTHERS change.

Got compelling evidence or support for these bald assertions?