Global Warming Case Study

One major objection many economists have to the question of carbon tax effectiveness is whether the taxes on carbon are high enough to create any change in

For example, under a cap-and-trade system, a company with large carbon emissions might pay $1 billion dollars upfront for a high cap, or pay almost $2 billion under a carbon taxing system. With our Cap-and-Tax program, a company might pay $500,000 to get a high cap on their emissions, then pay $750,000 in gas taxes. The company doesn’t have to pay a massive amount upfront, and doesn’t pay as much to carbon taxes. This system will make large carbon taxes more manageable for struggling companies, and save companies money from carbon

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

The issue of carbon emissions is an important one not only from an environmental perspective but also an economic one. While reducing carbon emissions is an important one for the health of human beings as well as that of the environment, the larger question is what type of policy strategy is best for both reducing such emissions which might have an impact on efforts to mitigate the effects of pollution on climate change. While ther are options to consider which does not rely on economics-- technological or output standards achieved by command and control regulations--they are often fraught with political resistance by industry because they do not allow industry to make any choices or play a role in solving the problem of

Cap-and-trade is environmentally and economically approach to capping and controlling greenhouse gas emissions which is the primary cause of global warming. It is a policy move aimed at controlling large amounts of gas emissions from a cluster of sources. This approach sets an overall cap which is the maximum amount of gas emissions per a stipulated compliance period, for all the sources under that particular program.

Charles Frank states in his article, at least with cap-and-trade “it sets the allowable quantity of emissions and has the advantage of making clear, through a market price for emissions, the actual costs of a stipulated quantity of reductions” (Frank, C., 2014). This could be viewed as a way to at least know what amount of emission should be expected depending on the emitter, therefore being better able to be controlled. It could be said that it is harder to administer cap-and-trade because the EPA must set

Although the Abbott’s government has an intention to subdue regulatory constraints on businesses by repealing the carbon tax, recently the senate has voted to block carbon tax repeal legislation which was convicted as ineffectiveness and high costing (Griffiths 2014). As a result, the carbon tax remains relatively high at a price of $24.15 per tone of CO2e Rio (Tinto Coal Australia 2011) which cost Rio Tinto $36.3 million in the last fiscal (Rio Tinto Coal Australia 2013), representing a “big government” trait. Attributing to the

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?

This is the third class I have taken where we have discussed cap & trade vs. carbon tax. I believe both systems have their merits and utilizing either one would positively affect climate change and the economy. I believe carbon taxes are the better of the two options because it is simple and immediately causes companies and individuals of ways to reduce fuel and energy consumption. Simply put the less fossil fuel used the less the tax affects the company or individual. Secondly money collected in taxes should be based right back to the businesses and individuals in the form of tax breaks and rebates. This will spark growth in the economy. Cap and Trade on the other hand set a predictable carbon dioxide levels and rewards companies for being beneath those limits by allowing them to sell their their unused allotment of carbon credits. Companies that have been able to meet their required levels can in turn by these extra allotments and in turn by themselves more time to develop new ways to reach the predetermined goal. This later system spars free trade and will have the overall affect of reducing carbon emissions however I believe it creates less of an initiative for bigger more lucrative companies to reduce carbon emissions and just gives them a way to buy themselves a way to continue to pollute above acceptable standards.

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.

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