I especially liked this paragraph: "Proponents’ related claim that carbon taxation will stimulate foundational innovation is, to put it diplomatically, a novel theory of innovation. Airplanes weren’t invented because of taxes on ships, nor the transistor because of taxes on vacuum tubes, nor the car from taxing horses. Taxing whale oil would not have led to coal-derived kerosene (which, by the way, is what saved the whales), nor would taxing coal have led to nuclear energy."
The inelasticty of energy makes it do that any taxes would be definition be regressive & a funnel for larger coffers. Let's travel north to Canada. Canada carbon tax is a patchwork, because some provinces were resistant to the idea, and others already had their own policies in place. There are also two systems for pricing carbon in Canada: the fuel charge, which is a consumer carbon tax on the gasoline and fossil fuels used to heat your house, and another system applied to industrial emitters. Heating oil was exempted due to political pressure. What where the result? Canada's oilsand production are at an all time high!
Let's go across the pond to Europe. While most countries there have a carbon/pollution tax, there are so many exceptions & exceptions that the % of green houses gas that are cover from 2%(Spain) to 71%(Ukranie), with the highest price in Sweden at $129.90 per ton.
So what we find is that any implementation of a carbon tax is not uniform, meaning production & usage will INCREASE, no matter the scenario & the countries with the highest per ton tax generally have a higher amount of non-carbon production of electricity, usually in the form of nuclear or hydro.
A Carbon Tax has come to the shores of the land of the free:
"Inflation Reduction Act, established a waste-emissions charge for methane from oil and gas facilities that report emissions of more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year to the EPA. The proposal announced Friday sets out details of how the fee will be implemented, including how exemptions will be applied."
Starting off at $900 per
charge for methane from oil and gas facilities that report emissions of more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year to the EPA, increasing to $1,500 by 2026.
Long post but the point is that taxes on energy consumption has now translated to taxes on "waste or byproduct" as a way to grab more money from the population.
Great points, Pablo. All of the arguments regarding methane emissions suggest that natural gas pipelines are the only source when, in fact, natural gas "seeps" are numerous., especially on ocean floors. Thanks for your comments, Pablo.
Another great article, Ed. Thanks for sharing Mark Mill's thoughts.
I think the true values (anti-human, anti-civilization) of radical environmentalists are becoming more obvious daily. It's puzzling to me why they are still given the time of day, so to speak - let them use sun dials.
Mark Mills ended-up in a good place - let's strengthen the infrastructure for when the climate does indeed change. After all, it will at some point - or did I miss out (again), this time being the scientific finding that 1890 weather is the Weather of Perpetuity and mankind must forever do whatever necessary to maintain the climate of that time? Just askin'.
I especially liked this paragraph: "Proponents’ related claim that carbon taxation will stimulate foundational innovation is, to put it diplomatically, a novel theory of innovation. Airplanes weren’t invented because of taxes on ships, nor the transistor because of taxes on vacuum tubes, nor the car from taxing horses. Taxing whale oil would not have led to coal-derived kerosene (which, by the way, is what saved the whales), nor would taxing coal have led to nuclear energy."
Al, that paragraph stood out to me as well. Ed
The inelasticty of energy makes it do that any taxes would be definition be regressive & a funnel for larger coffers. Let's travel north to Canada. Canada carbon tax is a patchwork, because some provinces were resistant to the idea, and others already had their own policies in place. There are also two systems for pricing carbon in Canada: the fuel charge, which is a consumer carbon tax on the gasoline and fossil fuels used to heat your house, and another system applied to industrial emitters. Heating oil was exempted due to political pressure. What where the result? Canada's oilsand production are at an all time high!
Let's go across the pond to Europe. While most countries there have a carbon/pollution tax, there are so many exceptions & exceptions that the % of green houses gas that are cover from 2%(Spain) to 71%(Ukranie), with the highest price in Sweden at $129.90 per ton.
So what we find is that any implementation of a carbon tax is not uniform, meaning production & usage will INCREASE, no matter the scenario & the countries with the highest per ton tax generally have a higher amount of non-carbon production of electricity, usually in the form of nuclear or hydro.
A Carbon Tax has come to the shores of the land of the free:
"Inflation Reduction Act, established a waste-emissions charge for methane from oil and gas facilities that report emissions of more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year to the EPA. The proposal announced Friday sets out details of how the fee will be implemented, including how exemptions will be applied."
Starting off at $900 per
charge for methane from oil and gas facilities that report emissions of more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year to the EPA, increasing to $1,500 by 2026.
Long post but the point is that taxes on energy consumption has now translated to taxes on "waste or byproduct" as a way to grab more money from the population.
Great points, Pablo. All of the arguments regarding methane emissions suggest that natural gas pipelines are the only source when, in fact, natural gas "seeps" are numerous., especially on ocean floors. Thanks for your comments, Pablo.
Thank you for the giving me the chance too.
Another great article, Ed. Thanks for sharing Mark Mill's thoughts.
I think the true values (anti-human, anti-civilization) of radical environmentalists are becoming more obvious daily. It's puzzling to me why they are still given the time of day, so to speak - let them use sun dials.
Mark Mills ended-up in a good place - let's strengthen the infrastructure for when the climate does indeed change. After all, it will at some point - or did I miss out (again), this time being the scientific finding that 1890 weather is the Weather of Perpetuity and mankind must forever do whatever necessary to maintain the climate of that time? Just askin'.
Well written
I agree. Mark Mills is a fantastic writer. Ed