Carbon Taxes First <ul><li>By Charles Komanoff </li></ul><ul><li>& Dan Rosenblum </li></ul><ul><li>Carbon Tax Center </li>...
Global Warming Is … <ul><li>Triggering a  climate crisis  that threatens massive and irreversible damage to our global env...
Warmer Winters:  4.3 º F, 1971-2002 Winter (Dec-Jan-Feb) Mean Temp ( ºF) Source: Cameron Wake, UNH Boston is the new Phill...
More Extreme Weather Cameron Wake, UNH Extreme Precipitation Events, Northeast US-Canada, 1949-2002
The Problem: Unsustainable  CO 2   Emissions Worldwide <ul><li>World must reduce emissions ~80% by 2050, with big cuts sta...
Americans Emit in a Day  What Others Emit in a Workweek
What about China? <ul><li>“ In an alliance of </li></ul><ul><li>denial, China and </li></ul><ul><li>the United States </li...
Chemistry  ->  Responsibility <ul><li>Because CO2 stays </li></ul><ul><li>“ resident” in the </li></ul><ul><li>atmosphere ...
No More Free Dumping <ul><li>“Since the dawn of the industrial revolution, the atmosphere has served as a free dumping gro...
Putting a Price on CO 2  Emissions <ul><li>High taxes on carbon emissions from coal, oil and natural gas will : </li></ul>...
Additional Benefits  of a Carbon Tax <ul><li>Carbon tax receipts may also be used to finance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Energy ...
Rely on “Market Forces”?  Here Come Synfuels <ul><li>Only a carbon  </li></ul><ul><li>tax can subject  </li></ul><ul><li>C...
Clean-Energy Subsidies: A Limited Answer <ul><li>Selecting the “next best energy technology” by fiat has largely benefited...
Efficiency Standards: Vital, but Not Enough <ul><li>Too slow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate resistance </li></ul></ul><ul...
More than Half of U.S. Oil Use  Is  Not  Gasoline for Cars Cars Freight Heat,   Power Other Air Paving RV’s
Example - Gas Use Decisions <ul><li>Gas Tax-Shift impacts: </li></ul><ul><li>How high CAFE is set </li></ul><ul><li>Mfg’er...
Dynamic Capitalism & CO2: I <ul><li>“ …  specially equipped, </li></ul><ul><li>privately owned jumbo </li></ul><ul><li>jet...
Dynamic Capitalism & CO2: II <ul><li>Backyard Blizzards :  </li></ul><ul><li>“ Snowmaking, since the </li></ul><ul><li>mid...
Example - Electricity <ul><li>Utilities and other generators will </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respond to price signal by substit...
Carbon Tax Proportions <ul><li>Fuels are taxed by their carbon content per btu </li></ul>
A “Starter” Carbon Tax-Shift <ul><li>$37 / ton of carbon = </li></ul><ul><li>10 ¢ / gallon of gasoline, jet fuel, etc. = <...
Energy Use:  Not  Inelastic <ul><li>Gasoline usage grew only 3.5% from 2003 to 2006, while the economy grew 11%. </li></ul...
Elasticity (long-run) Assumptions <ul><li>Gasoline:  ­ 0.4 </li></ul><ul><li>Electricity  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Residentia...
Starter Tax  – Why Ramp Up? <ul><li>Win broad consensus </li></ul><ul><li>Implement ASAP </li></ul><ul><li>Help people and...
USA After “Starter Tax x 10” <ul><li>CO 2  emissions down by a third </li></ul><ul><li>Oil use down by ~5 million barrels/...
The Wealthy Will Pay More
“Progressive” Use of  Carbon Tax Revenues <ul><li>EITHER </li></ul><ul><li>Distribute  pro rata to 320 million Americans  ...
Two Fossil Fuel Subsidies By Taxpayers: Relatively Small By Climate: Enormous
Existing Carbon Taxes (1 st -year Starter Tax shown for comparison) Per ton of car-bon
Politics? <ul><li>Concerns about carbon tax-shifting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Contrary to Americans’ sense of entitlement to ...
But: Growing Support for Taxing Carbon Emissions <ul><li>Opinion leaders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Al Gore </li></ul></ul><ul>...
Some Support in Opinion Polls <ul><ul><li>Feb. 2006 New York Times poll </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>55% would support i...
Carbon Tax v. Cap-and-Trade <ul><li>Cap-and-trade is alternative vehicle for “putting a price” on carbon </li></ul><ul><li...
Cap v. Tax: Predictable Prices <ul><li>Carbon taxes provide predictable prices necessary to encourage investment in </li><...
Are We Over-Valuing Cap-and-Trade’s “Emissions Certainty”? <ul><li>“Safety-valve” would authorize auctioning additional al...
Tax v. Cap: Timing <ul><li>C&T design and implementation: complicated, contentious, prolonged </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Le...
Tax v. Cap: Equity <ul><li>Cap-and-trade </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Practice has been to allocate based on past use </li></ul><...
Tax v. Cap: Understandability <ul><li>Carbon taxes provide direct, transparent and understandable price signals to consume...
Tax v. Cap: Comprehensiveness <ul><li>Carbon taxes address emissions from every sector </li></ul><ul><ul><li>All users mus...
Keys to Political Success <ul><li>Progressive Tax-Shifting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not a tax increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul...
Summary <ul><li>Principles </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tax-shifting  –  not  a tax increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Full-cost...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

CTC Slide Show Sept 2007

9,091 views

Published on

41 slides prepared by the Carbon Tax Center make the case for taxing carbon emissions from fossil fuels as an essential tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and protecting Earth's climate.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
9,091
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
61
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
448
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • CTC Slide Show Sept 2007

    1. 1. Carbon Taxes First <ul><li>By Charles Komanoff </li></ul><ul><li>& Dan Rosenblum </li></ul><ul><li>Carbon Tax Center </li></ul><ul><li>www.carbontax.org </li></ul><ul><li>2007 </li></ul>
    2. 2. Global Warming Is … <ul><li>Triggering a climate crisis that threatens massive and irreversible damage to our global environment, public health, world peace, national security and economic well-being. </li></ul><ul><li>No longer seriously contested by anybody other than vested interests, their hired “experts” and indebted politicians. </li></ul><ul><li>See An Inconvenient Truth and IPCC Fourth Assessment. </li></ul>
    3. 3. Warmer Winters: 4.3 º F, 1971-2002 Winter (Dec-Jan-Feb) Mean Temp ( ºF) Source: Cameron Wake, UNH Boston is the new Philly; NYC is the new D.C. (winter temperatures.) 38 39 40 41 42 43 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Latitude ( o N) o Boston New York Philadelphia Washington, DC
    4. 4. More Extreme Weather Cameron Wake, UNH Extreme Precipitation Events, Northeast US-Canada, 1949-2002
    5. 5. The Problem: Unsustainable CO 2 Emissions Worldwide <ul><li>World must reduce emissions ~80% by 2050, with big cuts starting now . </li></ul><ul><li>Americans are emitting many times our share of CO 2 (next slide). </li></ul><ul><li>Americans must reduce by >80%. </li></ul>
    6. 6. Americans Emit in a Day What Others Emit in a Workweek
    7. 7. What about China? <ul><li>“ In an alliance of </li></ul><ul><li>denial, China and </li></ul><ul><li>the United States </li></ul><ul><li>are using each </li></ul><ul><li>other’s inaction as </li></ul><ul><li>an excuse to do </li></ul><ul><li>nothing.” – New </li></ul><ul><li>York Times </li></ul><ul><li>editorial, 4-20-07 </li></ul>U.S. China Lines X in 2009 U.S. China Lines X in 2009 U.S. China X
    8. 8. Chemistry -> Responsibility <ul><li>Because CO2 stays </li></ul><ul><li>“ resident” in the </li></ul><ul><li>atmosphere for at </li></ul><ul><li>least a century, the </li></ul><ul><li>U.S. is responsible </li></ul><ul><li>for more than 3x as </li></ul><ul><li>much greenhouse </li></ul><ul><li>gas as China. U.S. </li></ul><ul><li>still has a 40-year </li></ul><ul><li>lead. </li></ul>U.S. China Lines X in 2009 U.S. China Lines X in 2009 U.S. China X
    9. 9. No More Free Dumping <ul><li>“Since the dawn of the industrial revolution, the atmosphere has served as a free dumping ground for carbon gases. If people and industries are made to pay heavily for the privilege, they will inevitably be driven to develop cleaner fuels, cars and factories.” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>— Avoiding Calamity on the Cheap , Nov. 3, 2006 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>New York Times editorial </li></ul></ul></ul>
    10. 10. Putting a Price on CO 2 Emissions <ul><li>High taxes on carbon emissions from coal, oil and natural gas will : </li></ul><ul><li>Reduce fossil fuel use and CO 2 emissions </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Substitution of clean fuels and technology </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>More efficient use of energy </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Provide a revenue stream to enable </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Progressive tax-shifting, or </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rebate to all U.S. residents </li></ul></ul></ul>
    11. 11. Additional Benefits of a Carbon Tax <ul><li>Carbon tax receipts may also be used to finance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Energy efficiency, further reducing use of fossil fuels and related emissions. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Energy R&D. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Will also reduce dependence on foreign oil, with major national security benefits. </li></ul><ul><li>Economically, will keep dollars in USA instead of flowing overseas. </li></ul>
    12. 12. Rely on “Market Forces”? Here Come Synfuels <ul><li>Only a carbon </li></ul><ul><li>tax can subject </li></ul><ul><li>CO 2 -intensive </li></ul><ul><li>oil sands, </li></ul><ul><li>oil shale, </li></ul><ul><li>coal-into-oil, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>to a climate- </li></ul><ul><li>appropriate </li></ul><ul><li>market test. </li></ul>
    13. 13. Clean-Energy Subsidies: A Limited Answer <ul><li>Selecting the “next best energy technology” by fiat has largely benefited lobbyists + special interests </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Oil shale, nuclear power, synfuels, ethanol, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Many new sources also emit CO 2 </li></ul><ul><li>Renewable Energy Standards: helpful – but not enough </li></ul>
    14. 14. Efficiency Standards: Vital, but Not Enough <ul><li>Too slow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate resistance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inherently reactive </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Corporate gaming </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(e.g., “CAFE ” loophole that enabled SUV’s) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Scattershot – impossible to regulate the hundreds of important energy-usage sectors </li></ul><ul><li>1-dimensional </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(e.g., CAFE doesn’t affect miles driven) </li></ul></ul>
    15. 15. More than Half of U.S. Oil Use Is Not Gasoline for Cars Cars Freight Heat, Power Other Air Paving RV’s
    16. 16. Example - Gas Use Decisions <ul><li>Gas Tax-Shift impacts: </li></ul><ul><li>How high CAFE is set </li></ul><ul><li>Mfg’er mpg decisions </li></ul><ul><li>What car to buy </li></ul><ul><li>Which car to drive </li></ul><ul><li>How to drive </li></ul><ul><li>VMT (miles traveled) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Share (carpool) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Chain trips </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transit </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Walk/Bike </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Proximity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>CAFE impacts: </li></ul><ul><li>Mfg’er mpg decisions </li></ul><ul><li>What car to buy </li></ul>
    17. 17. Dynamic Capitalism & CO2: I <ul><li>“ … specially equipped, </li></ul><ul><li>privately owned jumbo </li></ul><ul><li>jets – the kind that </li></ul><ul><li>normally carry 300-400 </li></ul><ul><li>passengers … recon- </li></ul><ul><li>figured … for the </li></ul><ul><li>enjoyment of, at most, </li></ul><ul><li>a couple of dozen.” </li></ul>New York Times, 17-Oct-2006: For the Super-Rich, It’s Time to Upgrade the Old Jumbo Jet
    18. 18. Dynamic Capitalism & CO2: II <ul><li>Backyard Blizzards : </li></ul><ul><li>“ Snowmaking, since the </li></ul><ul><li>mid-1960s the provenance </li></ul><ul><li>of ski resorts and, more </li></ul><ul><li>recently, some party </li></ul><ul><li>planners, has gone </li></ul><ul><li>domestic,” with 2-kW </li></ul><ul><li>plug-in snowmakers that </li></ul><ul><li>run ’round-the-clock. </li></ul>New York Times (Home Section) 15-Feb-2007: Not Enough Snow For You? Talk to Your Father
    19. 19. Example - Electricity <ul><li>Utilities and other generators will </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respond to price signal by substituting lower-carbon fuels </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Renewables </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Natural Gas </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Invest in efficiency on demand- and supply-side </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Consumers will </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Respond by using less </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Substituting low- or non-carbon energy </li></ul></ul>
    20. 20. Carbon Tax Proportions <ul><li>Fuels are taxed by their carbon content per btu </li></ul>
    21. 21. A “Starter” Carbon Tax-Shift <ul><li>$37 / ton of carbon = </li></ul><ul><li>10 ¢ / gallon of gasoline, jet fuel, etc. = </li></ul><ul><li>0.72 ¢ / kWh (U.S. retail average) </li></ul><ul><li>Reduces U.S. CO 2 emissions ~ 4% </li></ul><ul><li>Repeat 10 X (while standards and incentives also cut emissions) </li></ul>
    22. 22. Energy Use: Not Inelastic <ul><li>Gasoline usage grew only 3.5% from 2003 to 2006, while the economy grew 11%. </li></ul><ul><li>Pump prices have risen < 50% since 2003 (adjusted for inflation) – not the doubling commonly believed. </li></ul><ul><li>The modest growth in demand points to a “short-term price elasticity” of around 0.1, and 0.4 in the long term, for gasoline. </li></ul><ul><li>Finding: Demand for gasoline (and other fuels) is at least somewhat price-sensitive. </li></ul>
    23. 23. Elasticity (long-run) Assumptions <ul><li>Gasoline: ­ 0.4 </li></ul><ul><li>Electricity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Residential (37%) - 0.5 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commercial / Industrial (63%) - 1.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fuel-switching Leverage: 1.2 x </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ Other” – midway betw Gasoline/Elect. </li></ul>U.S. CO2 Reductions
    24. 24. Starter Tax – Why Ramp Up? <ul><li>Win broad consensus </li></ul><ul><li>Implement ASAP </li></ul><ul><li>Help people and businesses adapt </li></ul><ul><li>Empirical validation of efficacy </li></ul><ul><li>Mid-course corrections </li></ul><ul><li>Establish long-term price trajectory </li></ul><ul><li>Complement w/ investment in EE and renewables </li></ul>
    25. 25. USA After “Starter Tax x 10” <ul><li>CO 2 emissions down by a third </li></ul><ul><li>Oil use down by ~5 million barrels/day </li></ul><ul><li>Energy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Coal-fired generation reduced </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wind and other renewable generation increased </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Incandescents / halogens out , CFL’s + LED’s in </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Transportation and Land-Use </li></ul><ul><ul><li>SUVs out , sedans in </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Costlier air and highway travel creates market pull for 300-mph intercity rail </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Urban trips by bicycle up 10x, to 10% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Urban revitalization </li></ul></ul>
    26. 26. The Wealthy Will Pay More
    27. 27. “Progressive” Use of Carbon Tax Revenues <ul><li>EITHER </li></ul><ul><li>Distribute pro rata to 320 million Americans (~ $1,500 each, per year) </li></ul><ul><li>OR </li></ul><ul><li>Tax Shift out of regressive taxes (green bar at right assumes 2.5%/yr drops in emissions (net of +1.5%/y income, - 4%/y price) </li></ul>
    28. 28. Two Fossil Fuel Subsidies By Taxpayers: Relatively Small By Climate: Enormous
    29. 29. Existing Carbon Taxes (1 st -year Starter Tax shown for comparison) Per ton of car-bon
    30. 30. Politics? <ul><li>Concerns about carbon tax-shifting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Contrary to Americans’ sense of entitlement to “cheap energy” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anti-tax ideology of past 25 years </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Elected officials wary of another defeat </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Clinton’s 1993 Btu tax </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rep. John Anderson’s “50-50” program (1980 presidential campaign) </li></ul></ul></ul>
    31. 31. But: Growing Support for Taxing Carbon Emissions <ul><li>Opinion leaders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Al Gore </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scientists such as James Hansen (NASA) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>NY Times op-ed columnists Brooks, Friedman, Kristof, Krugman & Tierney </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conservatives including Gregory Mankiw, Bush chief Economic Advisor, 2003-2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CEO’s of Dynegy & FPL Group </li></ul></ul>
    32. 32. Some Support in Opinion Polls <ul><ul><li>Feb. 2006 New York Times poll </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>55% would support increased tax on gasoline if it reduced dependence on foreign oil. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>59% would support if the increased tax would curb energy consumption and global warming. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Oct. 2006 M.I.T. survey </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Over three years, 50% increase in respondents’ willingness to pay more for electricity to reduce global warming. </li></ul></ul></ul>
    33. 33. Carbon Tax v. Cap-and-Trade <ul><li>Cap-and-trade is alternative vehicle for “putting a price” on carbon </li></ul><ul><li>Proposed by US CAP – coalition of large environmental groups and large corporations </li></ul><ul><li>Emissions are capped at a level determined through the political process </li></ul><ul><li>Allowances/permits to emit CO 2 up to the cap are distributed or auctioned </li></ul><ul><li>Market participants can buy or sell as necessary </li></ul>
    34. 34. Cap v. Tax: Predictable Prices <ul><li>Carbon taxes provide predictable prices necessary to encourage investment in </li></ul><ul><ul><li>less carbon-intensive technology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>carbon-reducing energy efficiency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>carbon-replacing renewable energy </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Cap-and-trade aggravates price volatility that discourages beneficial investments </li></ul>
    35. 35. Are We Over-Valuing Cap-and-Trade’s “Emissions Certainty”? <ul><li>“Safety-valve” would authorize auctioning additional allowances if allowance prices exceed predetermined level </li></ul><ul><li>Emissions cap could be politically fragile without public support </li></ul><ul><li>No magic emissions level (except as low as possible) </li></ul>
    36. 36. Tax v. Cap: Timing <ul><li>C&T design and implementation: complicated, contentious, prolonged </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Level of cap </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Timing </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Allowance allocations </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Certification procedures </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Offsets </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Penalties </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Permit banking </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Inevitable requests for exemptions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Tax can be in place promptly with quick results </li></ul>
    37. 37. Tax v. Cap: Equity <ul><li>Cap-and-trade </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Practice has been to allocate based on past use </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rewards polluters with windfall </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Perverse incentive to pollute more now to increase base for allocations </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allowances can be auctioned off to highest bidders </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Proposed in RGGI program </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Proceeds used to provide public benefits </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lawyers and consultants are other big winners </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Carbon tax would be revenue-neutral </li></ul>
    38. 38. Tax v. Cap: Understandability <ul><li>Carbon taxes provide direct, transparent and understandable price signals to consumers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Perceived political liability, but essential to transform societal climate-awareness </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Cap-and-trade is complicated and opaque </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Perceived political asset, but limits public participation and could backfire </li></ul></ul>
    39. 39. Tax v. Cap: Comprehensiveness <ul><li>Carbon taxes address emissions from every sector </li></ul><ul><ul><li>All users must respond to price of carbon </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Most current cap-and-trade programs, as proposed, only target the electricity industry </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Only 40% of emissions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If allowances are allocated, polluters with sufficient allowances have less incentive to reduce emissions </li></ul></ul>
    40. 40. Keys to Political Success <ul><li>Progressive Tax-Shifting </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not a tax increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Carbon tax revenues used to reduce regressive payroll and sales taxes </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Provisions to Protect Low-Income Families </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reductions in payroll/sales taxes will offset all or a portion of the carbon tax </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other measures to reduce low-income energy use </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Message: Taxing pollution instead of productive work </li></ul>
    41. 41. Summary <ul><li>Principles </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tax-shifting – not a tax increase </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Full-cost pricing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Polluter pays </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Responds to concerns about </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Climate crisis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inequitable taxes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Security / Oil dependence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Basing economy on vulnerable energy </li></ul></ul>www.carbontax.org

    ×