Comment 130024

By PGFontana (registered) | Posted June 28, 2019 at 09:47:06

Economists agree?

"there is no consensus among economists on the optimal price of carbon" Glen Hodgson.

How about economist Mark Jaccard of SFU?

"climate pricing is not essential to stop burning coal and gasoline. We economists only say it because we prefer it. If we were being honest, we would explain that decarbonization can be achieved entirely without regulations"

More? Ok.

"Carbon pricing is sort of a red herring" says Jessica Green "it really derails the more meaningful parts of climate conversation that need to happen. There's a squabble over something that is environmentally speaking less efficacious than other pieces of the puzzle"

Economists Fergus Green and Richard Denniss both argue against carbon pricing in favour of "restrictive supply-side policy instruments" which they consider "sequencing policies"....because they actually excite the electorate,improve overall cooperation, and create feedback loops which support other climate initiatives.

Imagine that?

Jaccard calculated in April of this year that by pricing carbon at $50/Tonne we might reduce our emissions by 10-15/MT by 2030. "That means federally mandated carbon pricing may account for about 7% of what is required. At best"

And, oh yeah, nearly 7 out of every 10 Ontarian's think it's a grab.

So with 30 years to think about it, you've brokered a "plan" that is largely ineffective, and pisses people off.

You were right about that door. You didn't have to burst through it.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools