Carbon Limits, Yes; Energy Subsidies, No

Wall Street Journal: Carbon Limits, Yes; Energy Subsidies, No

 There isn't much doubt that Congress and incoming President Barack Obama will try to impose some kind of limits on carbon emissions. The Republicans, girding in opposition, are denouncing global warming as a fraud, and claiming that either a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system will impose an unacceptable burden on the economy.

Their strategy of stonewalling cedes the game in what will be the most dangerous aspect of carbon legislation — the effort to use the proceeds of an emissions tax to subsidize a dead-end expedition into "renewable" energy.

Whether global warming is real will probably not be known for another 50 years. There are signs, in the melting of the Arctic ice cap and warming in Alaska, that something unusual is happening to the climate. But skeptics note that world temperatures haven't risen since 1998 and that, if anything, recent weather has been unseasonably cold. Still, that doesn't mean we can dump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year without eventual consequences.

A $50 per ton carbon tax would raise gasoline prices about 25 cents per gallon — nothing we haven't experienced in the last two years — and accelerate a move toward electric hybrids, weaning us away from foreign oil. Nothing catastrophic there. The same levy would raise electric rates about 10%, which would encourage conservation while pushing us away from fossil fuels.

The real danger is that, instead of refunding the tax to consumers, Congress will grab the money to subsidize the current craze for specific forms of energy, particularly wind or biofuels. …

I agree with the general theme of this article. If carbon emissions are truly the problem, we have an economic externality (where significant transaction costs are borne by a third party who was not in on the transaction). Government intervenes to make the transactions reflect their true cost. By imposing a tariff, the transaction becomes more costly to the parties involved, incentivizing them to find alternatives. That is a legitimate role of government. However, like this author, I think markets, not government, needs to evolve the solutions.


Comments

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading