A Survey Conducted By Stanford University And Resources For The Future

Majority of carbon dioxide is released from big corporate companies and once this policy is implemented, they’ll start to look for alternative, more green sources of energy. Secondly, initiative from citizens is important as well. When residents start supporting locally grown food, using fuel-efficient vehicles or taking the public transit, it drastically reduces our carbon footprint. Lastly, it’s important to commercialize green energy. Although there are many smart companies like Tesla or First Solar, they are not enough. Coal or coal-reliant technologies are prevalent in our communities and therefore, generate the most profit. Therefore, if green technologies become more accessible to the general public, it’ll lead to the growth of this

The U.S government has been actively involved in overseeing emission standards for years. This corresponds with the statement made by the U.S Department of transportation that, “Transportation is the largest end-use sector emitting CO2”, and also the statement released by the NRCAN in which, “Fuel usage & carbon dioxide emissions have grown steadily over the past two decades.” These factors are only to be associated with your average four door sedan and/or light truck. These do not include your 18 wheelers, heavy trucks, or the gas guzzling vans that emit more carbon dioxide into the air and are also on the road more today than ever have been before. Cars are readily and easily obtainable more so now than ever have been. This creates more fuel to be burned up in which produces more toxins to be constantly released into the atmosphere. In fact, according to Scientific American “cars relate as much as 30 gallons of GHG, while only driving 3 miles.” These miles can be correlated with something just as simple as your average work commute. According to the United States Census Bureau, “Nearly 600,000 full-time workers had "megacommutes" of at least 90 minutes and 50 miles.” Those workers alone would each be releasing up to 500 gallons of GHG. These can be considered some of the bigger factors that the greenhouse gasses have taken a toll on.

In June of 2008, British Columbia became the first and only Canadian province to introduce a carbon tax, and has been praised and scone by environmentalists, economists, and politicians alike, arguing whether the tax is efficient or destructive method of controlling greenhouse gas emissions. The liberal premier Gordon Campbell introduced the carbon tax; its main purpose would be to enforce a carbon tax to increase the price of consumption of fossil fuels within the province, the philosophy behind the tax was to make taxes higher on the deemed environmentally detrimental purchases and lessen the tax on the others. The carbon tax promised to achieve this in a carbon neutral way, which meant that the revenue received from the tax would be

The main purpose of the carbon tax is reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to climate change. It would be unreasonable to ignore this environmental problem, because British Columbia is located in the region which is highly affected by the climate change impacts like flooding and wildfires. Therefore, B.C. government

Replace Cap & Trade Carbon Tax with environmentally responsible initiatives which reinvest revenue in Northern Ontario, a Carbon Tax placed on imports from excessive carbon producing countries of 10%.

In the beginning, the writers present the process of the research conducted by the MIT researchers and conclusions that showed how even a low carbon tax would be effective at lowering carbon emissions. The writers continue the article by pointing out the effects of different policies, relating to the revenue created from a carbon tax, on corporations and lower income households. Finally, the writers draw attention to the fact that this carbon tax will greatly influence the effects of global warming. This article was written for Americans and is a solution that is perfect for the political spectrum of any government institution within the United States. The article addresses ways that a carbon tax can be used to please both liberals and conservatives. Though the writers did not conduct their own research, they did cite a study conducted by university researchers and a government organization and use interviews with key researchers in the study. Though this article cites only one research study, the idea of a carbon tax is still a viable solution and it will be used in my research to show that there is a viable solution to the problem of air

Almost all people rely on gas, green or not green. Due to this, a tax would affect almost everyone. With raising taxes, people will consume less overall. This will lead all people to either drive less, or to buy a more efficient car. As mentioned previously, a higher mpg does not mean less gas consumption because may be inclined to drive more. If gas cost more, this would guarantee that the quantity demanded of gas would move leftward up the demand curve, therefore less gas would be consumed. Also, with this tax, the government would be left with some funds that could be used to reduce emissions as well. One example could be to invest the tax funds into a green-friendly public transport system. This would in theory reduce the amount of people using cars and reduce the overall amount of

In 2012 the Australian government announced a price on carbon, in the form of a carbon tax. The tax began at a fixed price of $23 per tonne of CO2. The labour

Stephane Dion (2007) published a summary of the liberal party’s proposal intended to decrease the carbon emissions in Canada. The liberal party suggested making the carbon emissions reduction not only a governmental concern but also the businesses need to get involved. This proposal recommended having a targeted goal so that all the businesses can be on the same page. The industries that would respect these new regulations and reduce their carbon emissions would be recognized and those that do not would be penalized. The party believed that the long-term positive effects outweigh socially and economically the negative impacts. The liberal party was certain that this new plan took into account the human lives threaten by climate change. Reading this article, the question that arose is: would this plan affect the economy of the country if applied?

Government enacted solutions are probably the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and to control pollution since unfortunately the majority of individuals mainly act to their own self-interest and are not concerned with the future of the planet. This is a prime example of the tragedy of the commons, which is the exploitation of a common resource. In this case the common resource is the atmosphere. The first method proposed is the carbon cap trade system. The term cap means the limit or the maximum of the amount of pollutant to be emitted. A trade refers to the transfer of permits that have to be bought by firms that need to increase their volume of emissions from firms that require fewer permits 1. The carbon tax method is a tax on the carbon content of fuels — effectively a tax on the carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels 2. So, which system would be best for the government to enact to reduce carbon emissions in the atmosphere?

In Australia, there is an emerging consensus that the government should take further actions to help mitigate and combat climate change. The current most accepted policy by government is the introduction of a carbon tax followed by an ETS in 2015. However we are focusing on the carbon tax in this essay and not the ETS. Here is a brief explanation of the dynamics of a carbon tax. A carbon tax is a tax on energy sources, which emit carbon dioxide (Co2). Therefore, carbon taxes address the problem of negative externality. Externalities are the subsequent effects when individual production or consumption of a particular good or service imposes costs or benefits on others. Therefore negative externalities are effects, which pose harm to others without their direct interaction (Basic Economics 2011). However, usual market practices and transactions do not reflect these cost and benefits in the prices involved in the transaction, or take into account in their transaction decision. Therefore this is a form of market failure. By imposing a cost on these negative externalities, the hidden cost can be addressed. Ultimately the purpose of a carbon tax is to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and therefore reduce

In managing the emissions of GHGs(Green House Gases), carbon taxes will be imposed mid 2012. "Economic theory anticipates that with the increased costs of emitting GHGs, drives emitters to downsize their activities." Salem Press (2009)

However, the Gillard government has instituted one fairly radical and controversial policy: the new imposed carbon tax which took effect on July 1, 2012. The tax requires 500 of Australia's top polluting companies to "pay a fixed price, starting at Aus$23 per tonne, for their carbon dioxide emissions for the first three years. The mechanism would then shift

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution machinery and surface temperatures have been on the rise. Some may argue that the increasing temperatures are strictly due to the rise of machinery and less strict efficiency standards. The U.S has been debating what methods are efficient for combating increasing emissions some argue that a carbon tax has many positive impacts some say if one were to be adopted they would need reforms. This paper will dive deep into the the effects of climate of change and whether or not a carbon tax can fully help to decrease these emissions.

What has changed in the last few hundred years is the additional release of carbon dioxide by human activities. Fossil fuels burned to run cars and trucks, heat homes and businesses, and power factories are responsible for about 98% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions, 24% of methane emissions, and 18% of nitrous oxide emissions. Increased agriculture, deforestation, landfills, industrial production, and mining also contribute a significant share of emissions. In 1997, the United States emitted about one-fifth of total global greenhouse gases.