<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Nature publishes my climate analysis and solution]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Ron Steenblik http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/ Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:04:42 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/1 More information on tax credits, please

Joseph, congratulations on getting tinto Nature.

I realize that this is a succinct summary of your recomenations, but when anybody starts calling for "... tax credits, loan guarantees or other incentives for low-carbon technology, ..." I start to get nervous. Especially with regard to tax credits,

Do you mean for production or for investment?
For how long would you give them out?
Would they be digressive over time?
In short, what is your exit strategy?

Tax credits are the easy out for policy makers, because they can establish them and then walk away, letting them run on autopilot. The main "program" supporting ethanol is a tax credit -- administered by the IRS, not the USDA or DOE.

It is hard to think of a policy instrument, in that case, that is less well targeted. It continues to pay out even when the industry is making money hand over fist. It does not appear in any agency's budget, so it is not subject to the same budget disciplines (only "pay -go") as would a more visible cash subsidy. And many people, especially libertarian wannabes (not thinking libertarians), think tax credits are great, on the perverse argument that any reduction in tax liability must by definition be a good thing. What they forget is that tax credits simply shift more of the nation's tax bill onto other taxpayers.

Finally, tax credits hide the true cost of what is being subsidized from consumers, and lead (in the case of energy) to more energy being consumed overall than if the form of energy you want to reduce consumption of is taxed.

These are only my personal opinions.




]]> More information on tax credits, please

Joseph, congratulations on getting tinto Nature.

I realize that this is a succinct summary of your recomenations, but when anybody starts calling for "... tax credits, loan guarantees or other incentives for low-carbon technology, ..." I start to get nervous. Especially with regard to tax credits,

Do you mean for production or for investment?
For how long would you give them out?
Would they be digressive over time?
In short, what is your exit strategy?

Tax credits are the easy out for policy makers, because they can establish them and then walk away, letting them run on autopilot. The main "program" supporting ethanol is a tax credit -- administered by the IRS, not the USDA or DOE.

It is hard to think of a policy instrument, in that case, that is less well targeted. It continues to pay out even when the industry is making money hand over fist. It does not appear in any agency's budget, so it is not subject to the same budget disciplines (only "pay -go") as would a more visible cash subsidy. And many people, especially libertarian wannabes (not thinking libertarians), think tax credits are great, on the perverse argument that any reduction in tax liability must by definition be a good thing. What they forget is that tax credits simply shift more of the nation's tax bill onto other taxpayers.

Finally, tax credits hide the true cost of what is being subsidized from consumers, and lead (in the case of energy) to more energy being consumed overall than if the form of energy you want to reduce consumption of is taxed.

These are only my personal opinions.




]]> Comment #2 by setb http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/ Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:37:42 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/2 What drives investment?

Joe-

Won't pricing carbon drive the rapid deployment of clean technologies while depressing the value of new drilling?  

 

]]> What drives investment?

Joe-

Won't pricing carbon drive the rapid deployment of clean technologies while depressing the value of new drilling?  

 

]]> Comment #3 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/ Sat, 21 Jun 2008 02:00:12 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/3 Humanity's battle of Thermopylae

Each of these wedges represents a staggering amount of effort by both the public and private sectors. For instance, one wedge of coal with carbon capture and storage represents a flow of carbon dioxide into the ground equal to the current flow of oil out of the ground. It would require, by itself, recreating the equivalent of the planet's entire oil delivery infrastructure over the course of five decades. And achieving all 11 wedges would still keep us on a path towards atmospheric levels of 1,000 p.p.m. of carbon dioxide by 2100 and a variety of catastrophic impacts, including the extinction of most species, the desertification of one-third of the planet, and a return to temperatures not seen since the Earth was ice-free.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Humanity's battle of Thermopylae

Each of these wedges represents a staggering amount of effort by both the public and private sectors. For instance, one wedge of coal with carbon capture and storage represents a flow of carbon dioxide into the ground equal to the current flow of oil out of the ground. It would require, by itself, recreating the equivalent of the planet's entire oil delivery infrastructure over the course of five decades. And achieving all 11 wedges would still keep us on a path towards atmospheric levels of 1,000 p.p.m. of carbon dioxide by 2100 and a variety of catastrophic impacts, including the extinction of most species, the desertification of one-third of the planet, and a return to temperatures not seen since the Earth was ice-free.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Comment #4 by TheWizardfromOz http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/ Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:57:24 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/back-to-nature/4 Tax reform drives all the wedges

The wedges concepts are correct in principle as by its very nature renewable energies are dilute compared to fossil fuels and uranium.

However, government's don't need to guess in advance of winners and losers.  That is for investors to do.   The governments role is to provide the necessary long term fiscal incentives.  

Simply move the tax revenue sources away from income and other taxes and correspondingly increase taxes on the prime sources of greenhouse gas emissions.  The market will do the rest.
For more information see http://www.garnautreview.org.au/CA25734E0016A131/pages/su ...

]]> Tax reform drives all the wedges

The wedges concepts are correct in principle as by its very nature renewable energies are dilute compared to fossil fuels and uranium.

However, government's don't need to guess in advance of winners and losers.  That is for investors to do.   The governments role is to provide the necessary long term fiscal incentives.  

Simply move the tax revenue sources away from income and other taxes and correspondingly increase taxes on the prime sources of greenhouse gas emissions.  The market will do the rest.
For more information see http://www.garnautreview.org.au/CA25734E0016A131/pages/su ...

]]>