Why I'm (slightly) less pessimistic about global warming - The Washington Post - 0 views
-
As a starting point, I’ve accepted the prevailing scientific view that man-made greenhouse gases contribute to global warming.
-
ut I’ve been routinely pessimistic and skeptical that we can do much about it. That is, we can’t easily control the forces that worsen global warming.
- ...11 more annotations...
-
Most nations aren’t willing to scrap the energy status quo — the very basis of modern civilization — before having a practical substitute
-
That’s a standard carbon tax. What defines the “carbon dividend” plan is that all the money collected would be rebated to households.
-
Under one proposal, the government would slap a $43 tax on each ton of CO2. That would equal about 38 cents on a gallon of gasoline
-
It would raise about $180 billion in the tax’s first year, he says. If the “dividend” — the tax rebate — were distributed evenly, that would be about $1,400 per household.
-
Without the tax, projected CO2 emissions would be 5.4 billion metric tons in 2035. With the tax, the total would be 3.6 billion metric tons, a 33 percent decline
-
the initial increase in gasoline prices of 38 cents a gallon is within normal market fluctuations. The rebate would sweeten the tax. Consumers who cut fossil fuel use would come out ahead.
-
None of this has changed my long-standing skepticism that, without some major technological breakthrough (safer nuclear power?), it will be exceedingly hard to halt the increase in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. The required changes in lifestyle and economic activity are simply too great.