TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

A Call for a Carbon Tax From Elon Musk...and Many Others

Discussion in 'Energy, Environment, and Policy' started by Norbert, Nov 17, 2012.

  1. Norbert

    Norbert TSLA will win

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,424
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Article by Jim Motavalli which points to a discussion of this topic on a large scale :

    A Call for a Carbon Tax From Elon Musk...and Many Others | PluginCars.com

     
  2. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
  3. Lloyd

    Lloyd Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    4,883
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    Dont think this is a free ride for EV's! Taxing carbon will make the price of all energy soar!. Gas, Electricity, Airline tickets, Energy dependent industries, Food, and most goods and services. I don't agree with this tax. We pay enough without new taxes. IMO
     
  4. Martini

    Martini Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2012
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Paris, France, France
    One of the main arguments for a carbon tax is base-shifting. More carbon tax=less income tax. You just have to trust the government to deliver. Carbon tax and cap-and-trade are basically the same in terms of the incentives they produce, but they have different information requirements for the policy maker. No other policy approach gets the job done with the same level of efficiency. And no other policy approach is less likely to happen.
     
  5. JRod0802

    JRod0802 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    661
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Never trust the government to deliver.
     
  6. mattjn

    mattjn Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    56
    Location:
    USA
    Yeah, the idea that the government would reduce a tax already in service is laughable.
     
  7. mknox

    mknox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,552
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    No kidding! Here in Canada, we still pay fuel taxes that were bumped up years ago to "nationalize" Petro-Canada (Allowed them to buy out Fina, Gulf and other gasoline retailers). Subsequent governments have sold off interest in Petro-Can (now owned by Suncor) but the tax is still there.
     
  8. brianman

    brianman Burrito Founder

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    15,487
    There is no such thing as a revenue neutral deal. At least, not one that makes it into law.
     
  9. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    According to one reputable study, the national average effect of a $25/MTCO2e tax would be to raise energy prices from $88/MWh to $100/MWh. This increase, however, is greatest in areas in with the lowest starting price of energy: the Midwest and Southeast see a rise of $16-21/MWh, while the Northeast would see a rise of $6-11/MWh. California would only see a $5-6 increase on its $136/MWh base price (in 2020).

    A carbon tax (or, equivalently, carbon cap-and-trade) is essential if we're going to spur long-term investment in low-carbon-emitting sources. It should replace the patchwork system of renewable energy subsidies. While I agree with the general proposition that we shouldn't increase the overall tax burden, I think it important that we reduce taxes on "goods" such as labor. When we have a "bad" that's sitting there untaxed, namely carbon emissions, there's an obvious policy win-win scenario.
     
  10. wycolo

    wycolo Active Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,422
    Location:
    WY
    Retire the term 'foreign oil', like domestic oil can be burned/wasted guilt-free.
    --
     
  11. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,848
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    True, but the federal government has also significantly reduced income taxes since then, and reduced the GST rate...

    The only problem is holding the politicians' feet to the fire on keeping it "revenue neutral". When Stephan Dion was proposing a carbon tax here, he promised it would be revenue neutral - increase carbon tax, decrease income taxes. Unfortunately if you looked at the details, some of the "neutral" was actually increased social spending! That's NOT revenue neutral, that's tax-and-spend! With that kind of crap all the time it's no wonder no one trusts the government to implement a revenue neutral tax shift.
     
  12. drees

    drees Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,121
    Location:
    San Diego
    Perhaps you should look at California bill AB 1077. That would be a significant tax reduction for future EV owners. On an electric vehicle which gets a $10,000 discount thanks to tax-credits and state-rebates, that can save almost $1,000 in sales tax and more every subsequent year thanks to a reduction in the vehicle license fee.

    Contrast that to other states (MI is the latest example) who are aiming to raise taxes on EVs at a cost likely greater than revenue collected for the foreseeable future thanks to low sales in those states.

    So see - it can be done when govt wants to encourage certain behavior.
     
  13. Kaivball

    Kaivball Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    670
    Location:
    Kalifornia
    Because giving more money to the government will stop the climate from changing, lol.
     
  14. SwedishAdvocate

    SwedishAdvocate Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,648
    Location:
    Sweden, Earth
    Because not giving more money to the government will stop the climate from changing; ”The ’free’ ’market’ will take care of it.” Rolling around on my parquet floor and laughing out loud!
     
  15. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    If I were the benevolent but absolute dictator of the world economy, I would announce that, as of 1 Jan 2020, there will be a $50/MTCO2e tax globally. This lag would give economies time to adjust their capital stocks to use less carbon, reducing the huge hit that people would feel because their purchase decisions (e.g. automobiles) were based on a zero price for carbon emissions.

    Pricing NOx and SO2 has been enormously successful in transforming the US power sector to emit less of those pollutants; pricing CO2 emissions would have a comparable effect. If there's no price, the market won't respond with new technologies and rational capital investments.
     
  16. VolkerP

    VolkerP EU Model S P-37

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,455
    Location:
    Germany
    Let's have a poll to put Robert in that position :wink:

    I would like to see that announcement to ramp up by $5M/MTCO2e yearly, starting right now at current prices of the EU emissions trading platform (around $10/T CO2e -- way too low). The schedule must be defined to run at least until 2050, because investments in some power plant are calculated for 40 years.
     
  17. ItsNotAboutTheMoney

    ItsNotAboutTheMoney Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    4,493
    Location:
    Maine
    Revenue neutral has to include social spending. Carbon taxation increases prices so you have to increase welfare benefits to match appropriately. It's especially true because people at the bottom don't have the capital or power to make rapid change. For example, people on low incomes end up driving other peoples' cast offs, so high fuel prices hit working poor first and the effects last for many years.

    EDIT: note that I'm not arguing they weren't doing a Sandy, just that you can't expect all of the revenue to go back to taxpayers.
     
  18. Kaivball

    Kaivball Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    670
    Location:
    Kalifornia
    You mean we need to spend countless billions more so the government can save us just like they won the war on poverty and drugs and terrors? Lol.

    This will en just another slush fund for politicians to finance more fraud, more abuse and more waste of tax payer money.

    The government can't even compete at the Post office level with the private sector but will stop the earth climate from changing?

    Hahahahahahahaha. Now that is really funny.

    Feel free to pay your sin tax for exhaling CO2. I for one will sit back and laugh at the lemmings that follow one crisis after the other (global cooling, global famine, man made global warming, etc, etc).

    I always wonder where this near religious unwavering faith in almighty government comes from. I guess the atheists must find something to believe in.
     
  19. drees

    drees Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,121
    Location:
    San Diego
    Gee Kaivball - how many half-truths, red herrings and straw-men can you build in one post? I do think you win the record. I don't even know where to begin, but I'm sure someone will take the time to write a line-by-line rebuttal.

    BTW - where is Kalifornia?
     
  20. mknox

    mknox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,552
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    Not sure I agree with all your points, but I do believe you're on to something with this. I too am amazed at how people will not want to take any responsibility for their own actions, but demand/insist that it's the government's duty to "fix" whatever is perceived to be broken. (speaking generally, of course. Not pointing fingers at anyone here :wink:)
     

Share This Page