Carbon Tax Essay

Currently, the Canadian government is taking several initiatives to control climate change. In 2017, Canada signed the Paris Accord and agreed to cut 30% of carbon emissions by 2030.

Stewart Elgie, a University of Ottawa law and economics professor and chair of the green economy think-tank Sustainable Prosperity suggests that British Columbia’s per-capita fuel usage had fallen more than 4 per cent compared with the rest of Canada and its economy (Ebner, McCarthy, 2011) Evidently it is reducing the amount of green house gasses emitted by fossil fuel use. However this is not the concern many had with the introduction of the tax, but the concerns were focused upon the externalities caused by this and the effects it would have on the economy. Three years since the carbon tax introduction and the Provincial level of GDP has remained approximately the same, (Greenery in Canada: We have a winner) With the provincial level of GDP remaining around the same, this suggests that at the very worst the carbon tax has had no negative effects to the provincial economy. Furthermore the tax also promised to remain carbon neutral and promised to cut corporate and private income tax. British Columbia has become the province with the lowest income tax regime and the lowest corporate tax regime (Greenery in Canada: We have a winner). Although the carbon tax is being praised by many, it still faces concerns as many still argue the ineffectiveness of the tax and what that means for the province.

For the last two decades, the increased use of fossil energy caused the environmental problems. The evidence of global warming, like drying rivers, extinction of species, melting of glaciers, became more often around the planet. The climate change became a threat to healthy environment and prosperity of humanity and wildlife, and the world community started searching for solution to combat climate change. In 2008 British Columbia introduced carbon tax on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to reduce global warming. Starting from $10 per tonne of CO2, the price was increasing annually till it reached $30 per tonne in 2012. During that period British Columbia was reducing harmful emissions and improving economy comparing to the rest of Canada. However, since the price rise on carbon stopped in 2012, no improving changes in cutting emissions, economy, and overall quality of life have been noticed. In this essay I will persuade that British Columbia should continue gradually increase price on carbon tax to the level where it will significantly cut the use of dirty energy, provide enough investments into the green projects, and support low-income families.

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

Ontario has its own creative and effective strategies to combat climate change. One of Ontario’s goal is a low-carbon future. To accomplish this the province started making carbon reductions in 1990 and are on track to reduce carbon emissions by 15% in 2020, 37 per cent in 2030 and 80 per cent in 2050 (Climate Change Action Plan, 2017). Ontario’s target of reducing emissions by 6% was met on schedule in 2014 (Climate Change Action Plan, 2017). One of the reasons this has been made possible is because of Ontario’s investment in carbon reduction. For example, in 2015 Ontario committed $325-million payment to Ontario’s Green Investment Fund to support programs that help households and businesses implement

Electricity generation is Canada's fourth-largest source of greenhouse gas. When it comes to controlling the emission that comes from electricity generation; most provinces in Canada are already opting out of the coal phase to provide cleaner energy. The burning of firewood to create energy releases CO2 into the atmosphere thereby introducing more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.therefore introducing approaches to electricity such as increasing the amount of electricity generated from renewable sources; connecting clean power with places that need it and modernising electrical system could bring Canada to its goal by at least 5% to 15%. New rules that help to control emissions from an electrical sector that is burning natural gases should also be implemented. the government Could also control greenhouse gas emission by mandating the carbon pricing policy. Carbon pricing charges industries and corporations that emit CO2 for their emissions. This limits their emissions by instituting a price charge and encourage companies and consumers from burning fossil fuel and find alternative ways that are efficient for their business. Carbon pricing has been known to be the best tool in reducing greenhouse gas emissions since most of the gases released into the atmosphere are carbon. Carbon pricing helps to fight climate change and it provides job opportunity in creating clean energy. the growing population is also a discussable topic in climate change that could be really hard to control due to the fact that as the population increases; the demand for products that release this toxic gases would also increase. The government could control this by finding alternative ways to produce these commodities without introducing so much carbon or methane into the

The Climate Leadership Plan in both Federal and Provincial Governments (Alberta, BC, and Federal) impose restrictions and carbon tax leading to increased administration costs and reduced profitability.

Since the proposal, some provinces have adopted the carbon pricing policy in order to encourage the companies to reduce their carbon emissions. Other provinces are still being resistant to the idea mostly because they are skeptical about the economic impacts. A successful example of province that applied this policy is British Columbia. Ian Bruce and

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 February 2011, the Australian federal government declared a scheme to implement a Carbon Tax from July 1, 2012. Implementing this scheme has generated a controversial debate between Australians. The term “Carbon tax” refers to an environmental tax forcing polluters to pay per ton of carbon which they release into the atmosphere. This essay will provide the economical, social and political implication of carbon taxes, also with its introduction who will benefit and who would suffer.

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

The new carbon tax which was implemented in 2017 will be doing great things for the environment. The government of Alberta website stated that they will be using 6.2 billion dollars to help the environment. Some of the money will be going to wind farms, solar panels, and other environmentally friendly infrastructure. The carbon levy will help ease the change from coal and gas energy to more environmentally friendly energy sources. In addition; the tax will cover 78-90% of Alberta carbon emissions and in a couple of years when the environmentally friendly infrastructure is in place we can expect that number to go up. If everybody was fully educated about all of the benefits of the carbon tax then almost nobody would be against it. But since all Albertans have heard is that it will cost them money they have been against it. Just as the carbon tax may be taking money out of our pockets currently it also will soon bring a dramatic change in our quality of life.

Should the U.S federal government adopt a carbon tax to decrease c02 emissions of public and private franchises.