• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Man-made climate change - we're doomed!

wickedken

TRIBE Member
More recent stanford research is now available:

https://www.worldscientific.com/toc/cce/09/01

"Eleven teams participated in a recent Stanford Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) project, examining the economic and environmental impacts of a carbon tax. The studies included “revenue recycling,” in which the funds generated from a carbon tax are returned to taxpayers either through regular household rebate checks (similar to the Citizens’ Climate Lobby [CCL] and Climate Leadership Council [CLC] proposals) or by offsetting income taxes (similar to the approach in British Columbia).

Among the eleven modeling teams the key findings were consistent. First, a carbon tax is effective at reducing carbon pollution, although the structure of the tax (the price and the rate at which it rises) are important. Second, this type of revenue-neutral carbon tax would have a very modest impact on the economy in terms of gross domestic product (GDP). In all likelihood it would slightly slow economic growth, but by an amount that would be more than offset by the benefits of cutting pollution and slowing global warming."

So yes - the evidence suggests this policy is a bit of a no brainer.
Hey if we can save the planet and not pay anything for it then it's pretty obvious. What's not to like? According to the CBC, only "wealthy people" will end up paying more, and who cares about them right? No brainer!
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Hey if we can save the planet and not pay anything for it then it's pretty obvious. What's not to like? According to the CBC, only "wealthy people" will end up paying more, and who cares about them right? No brainer!
The point is that companies that don't pollute (or at least pollute less) *won't* need to raise prices, and thus get an advantage. Consumers get the rebate regardless of which they buy. Everybody wins except the companies that can't/won't reduce their emissions.

It really is a no brainer!

More could be done, certainly, but this is the right direction for sure - and is fundamentally a conservative, market-oriented policy.
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
The point is that companies that don't pollute (or at least pollute less) *won't* need to raise prices, and thus get an advantage. Consumers get the rebate regardless of which they buy. Everybody wins except the companies that can't/won't reduce their emissions.

It really is a no brainer!

More could be done, certainly, but this is the right direction for sure - and is fundamentally a conservative, market-oriented policy.
I know! You know that even when Exxon Mobile supports carbon taxation that it must be good.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Wife and I joining more and varied climate groups - noticing a rise of "Doomists" - kind of a weird pseudoscience/quasi-conspiracy subculture in the "Climate change is real" camp but some even going so far as to say we're gonna turn to Venus in a few decades.

You can totally see like, why they would freak out a bit i mean - most science lately is, well, kind of alarming. Feedback loops we didn't factor in, oceans taking warmth deep so we weren't truly tracking the rise in ocean temp - methane appearing in higher quantities than we expected given what we know was one story just from the last weeks in a run of these!

So I get it - but talking to "doomists" can be just as frustrating as talking to climate denialists - and they both end up feeding a hopelessness and futility and bottomless cynicism about anything we can do to make things less shitty for us.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
I also like the way Jerry Taylor talks about it, he gives conservatives rationales they can glom into easier, like how future warming costs exceed short term mitigation costs and how investors hedge on risks when they face potential high cost investment decisions right - so why wouldn't we hedge risks related to climate change?
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
They talk a big game about saving money, improving the playing field for folks, yet they never do tho... Why?
Bet there's a rationale for it! In other news carbon has apparently reached some sort of threshold in the atmosphere. Glad the carbon tax is going to solve that problem.
 
Top