12 November 2015

The climate crisis doesn't end with the Keystone XL

Obama says he will not give a permit for the Keystone XL, a project that I have supported in the past.

The end of the Keystone will:*
  • NOT keep Canadian tar sands from being produced
  • NOT reduce the number of trains carrying crude with far more risk of accident
  • NOT reduce American (or world) energy consumption
  • NOT "fix" the climate change problem"**
That's because the pipeline is only there to meet demand. If you want to reduce demand, then you have to raise the price of oil or -- more accurately -- CO2 emissions.

The best way to do this is via a carbon tax. The easiest way to do this is by raising the gasoline tax from its incredibly low level of $0.49/gallon ($0.13 liter -- it's $0.77/liter in the Netherlands) to merely $1/gallon.***

What do you get with doubling the tax?
  • Lower gasoline use (probably 5% lower, given the tax's small share of total price and 0.3 short term price elasticity) and thus CO2 emissions 
  • More money to pay for road maintenance (this article says they need to "double funding"), releasing general tax revenue for other uses.
Bottom Line: Obama the lame duck should go for a real policy: a gas tax or, better yet, a carbon tax (They work!)

* Coyote suggests a "hack" to allow a "Keystone-equivalent." It may happen.

** I am hoping that delegates at the upcoming Paris meetings commit to reducing GHG emissions via national -- NOT international -- regimes that can be implemented and enforced under domestic laws. The most promising regime is a carbon tax, because it raises revenues. Cap and trade is lovely on paper but usually a practical failure in implementation (e.g., too many free permits in the ETS). A shift of rhetoric, from "limits on economic activity" to "taxing harm", might get more political support.

*** Even easier, in countries that SUBSIDIZE fuel use, is to remove subsidies.

2 comments:

  1. In the US the federal gasoline tax is 18.4 cents/Gallon. Raising it to $1/gallon would be to quintuple it--politically pretty much impossible. Even if you consider state and federal combined--maybe you were thinking of California--doubling any tax that fundamental to so many peoples' lives is politically pretty much a non-starter. Maybe you should reconsider your opposition to cap and trade, which does have examples of working in the past, and which has a much higher chance of being actually adopted in the near term.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @freude -- Quintupling it only adds $0.80 to the price of gas, which is $3-4 already. Depends where the money goes, if course, in terms of political acceptance. Cap and trade? I think that's a broken system, given politicians' habit of giving away permits.

      Delete

Spam will be deleted. Comments on older posts must be approved.
If you're having problems posting, email your comment to me