Answering a critic of carbon fee-and-dividend

If a group is not talking about carbon fee-and-dividend then it is not really talking about ways to control human-caused climate change

Readers of the Times might recall that longtime North Thompson resident Jean Nelson and your editor cycled from Toronto to Ottawa last spring to publicize a petition calling for a Canada-wide referendum on carbon fee-and-dividend.

Carbon fee-and-dividend is a method to help control human-caused climate change. It would put a fee on fossil fuels, similar to a carbon tax, but all the money collected would be returned to individuals as equal dividends.

Dr. James Hansen, in some ways the dean of climate scientists, has advocated for carbon fee-and-dividend for many years. Quite a few top economists agree that carbon fee-and-dividend would be the best and most effective mechanism to control global warming.

Somewhat surprisingly, Hansen has complained bitterly about major environmental groups (what he calls “Big Green”) that not only do not support carbon fee-and-dividend, but that also appear to oppose it.

Carbon Washington, the group that has successfully raised enough signatures to force a referendum on a revenue-neutral carbon tax in that state, has been opposed by a consortium of environmental groups that want the money raised by the carbon tax to go to “green infrastructure” and not to reducing other taxes.

Recently Jean Nelson contacted a prominent B.C. environmentalist who does not support CF&D and asked him why not.

In his reply he said, in part, “… we need as much of the carbon tax income as possible to invest in climate solutions.”

No doubt at least some of the money raised through carbon taxes should be used this way.

However, it is hard to believe that all of it or even a majority should be.

Like it or not, carbon fee-and-dividend is going to have to do most of the heavy lifting.

Here are some arguments against the prominent B.C. environmentalist’s position:

1. CF&D would be more politically acceptable. In order for a price on carbon to have an adequate effect it’s going to have to be pretty high. A reasonable guess would be around $300/tonne carbon dioxide, or 10 times B.C.’s present carbon tax. People will not accept that unless they see some direct benefit coming back to them – a sizeable dividend cheque in the mail.

2. If a carbon tax were several times higher than B.C.’s and all or most of it going into government revenue, governments would become dependent on it as a cash cow. There would be tremendous pressure not to raise the carbon tax so high as to damage the fossil fuel industry. If the revenue were to go out as dividends, on the other hand, we can rely on people to want their cheques to be as big as possible, even if that means wrecking the fossil fuel industry, which is what we want.

3. Governments do not have a good record picking new and innovative technologies. CF&D would create a huge market for alternative energy under a free market system. Inventors would go out, raise capital and, if their ideas are good ones, become successes. This would be preferable to having government committees determine the winners and losers among new ideas.

4. CF&D would directly address the growing economic inequality in Canada and the world. It is hard to see how investing in green infrastructure, etc. would have any effect on economic inequality.

5. CF&D is simple, inexpensive and transparent. All of the alternatives are not.

Why have no major environmental groups endorsed carbon fee-and-dividend?

My suspicion is they do not want to alarm the donors that they rely on for funding. Carbon fee-and-dividend, on the other hand, would be alarmingly disruptive.

The fact is, however, that if a group is not talking about carbon fee-and-dividend then they are not really talking about ways to control human-caused climate change.


Just Posted

Community of Vavenby: weekly news update

Railroad tracks being replaced from Clearwater to Blue River

Lambing in full swing at Aveley Sheep Ranch

Spring is here and this may be most obvious at Aveley Heritage… Continue reading

RCMP looking for grain haulers dumping grain on roadside pull-outs

Illegal practice happening on Highway 5 between Valemount and Avola

Personal Development Weekend Retreat coming up

By K.A. Pendergast Have you ever been stressed? I am sure most… Continue reading

MayDay Parade Theme is “Clearwater Life”

Parade takes place May 18 and starts at Capostinsky Park

What’s age got to do with it? B.C. couple with 45-year gap talks happy marriage

An Armstrong couple that has 45-year age gap began turning heads after being featured on show Extreme Love.

B.C. men challenge constitutionality of Canada’s secret no-fly list

Parvkar Singh Dulai says he received a “denial of boarding” notification under the no-fly program last May 17

Murder on B.C. property didn’t need to be disclosed before sale, court rules

Buyer had tried to break contract after learning a man with ties to crime had been murdered there

B.C.’s largest Vaisakhi festival target of threatening Facebook post: Surrey RCMP

Police say they are investigating the posts on Facebook, after local MLA forwarded screenshots

Pug life: B.C. town boasts waggish list of dog names

Freedom-of-information request lists most ‘pupular’ dog names registered in White Rock

VIDEO: Fish farming company launches $30-million vessel to treat salmon for sea lice in B.C. waters

Freshwater treatment an improvement but fish farms should be removed from sea, says conservationist

Singh says childhood abuse steeled him for scrutiny and stress of politics

He recounts the assaults for the first time in his book Love & Courage

Despite five extra weeks’ parental leave in Canada, dads still face stigma: survey

One reason people said dads don’t need leave is because they can just bond with their kids at weekend

Vintage bottles, magic cards, a 1969 Playboy: Quirky items found in historic B.C. buildings

Crews set aside some of the funkier pieces emerging from the construction rubble

Most Read