Eco Fiscal Policies And Carbon Pricing Policies

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.

We plan to implement a taxing system on carbon emissions that we call “Cap-and-Tax” and increase the gas tax to encourage responsible use of gas.

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%.

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.

Climate change has been an increasing concern in today’s world and has proven to be detrimental in the coming years. With the increasing human population, the consumption of fossil fuels has been in high demand and this poses a threat in the future. After several years of political and cultural pressure to take a stand on climate change and in order to control the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere, British Columbia implemented the carbon tax on July 1, 2008 (Murray and Rivers, page 3). This tax was the first to be imposed in North America and was revenue-neutral (Murray and Rivers, page 3). Due to its myriad of benefits, the carbon tax was favored by many and did has not disappointed; not only have greenhouse gas emissions dropped, but business have grown tremendously, and other energy sectors are flourishing. While counter arguments may highlight the negative effects of the taxation policy, rebuttals often overlook the long-term advantages. In this paper, I will prove that the carbon tax policy in British Columbia has had several beneficial outcomes such as the reduction of greenhouse gases and economic growth. I will then raise an opposition to my thesis by arguing that the short-term economic effects will be damaging to the lower-income classes. However, I will show that this objection is not as valid because the long-term benefits, both economically and environmentally will ultimately prove integral in the alleviating future climate change.

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?

Hansen begins his essay with his assertion that in publicly agreeing to objectives like those proposed by the Kyoto Protocol, governments are being intentionally misleading. To demonstrate, he outlines six examples, including allowing the construction of new coal-fired power plants and development of tar sands, as evidence of the government's resistance towards solving what he calls the "climate problem". Afterwards, Hansen indicates that these examples are not an exhaustive list, implying that he believes there are many more examples of the government impeding environmental protection. He goes on to discuss his assertion that governments are under the influence of special interest groups, discouraging the implementation of policies that would decrease environmental damage. Hansen proposes introducing a flat carbon price or fee applied to all fossil fuels.

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 economics of climate change is a very controversial and disputed. To even discuss what should be done economists have to either state whether or not global warming and climate change exist. According to the CATO article, Climate Change vs. Climate Models (Michaels and Knappenberger, 2013), “The models’ estimate of the increase in temperature resulting from a doubling of carbon dioxide concentration may simply be too high.” As questioned in the article, is there such thing as climate change? Next, if climate change does exist, are carbon emissions a relevant cause of such a phenomena? With all of these questions at hand, how do we deal or cope with the current environmental state through economic means?

Pollution, specifically global warming, is of growing concern to people and governments. It is a controversial issue whose validity is still being debated by scientists. The Kyoto Protocol is an international attempt to address global warming through emissions controls. Traditional neoclassical economic models do not incorporate pollution in rudimentary theories of supply, demand, or pricing, as a result, firms do not consider pollution as a cost of production, which leaves government regulation as the primary method for controlling these externalities. The goal of emissions trading is to allow one business, which can make greenhouse gas emission reductions for a relatively low cost, to sell