Wednesday 14 January 2009

Carbon tax versus cap and trade

There is an endless stream of articles about the climate impact of our daily lives and shopping choices. Today, it transpires that surfing the internet is bad. This lengthens the list of daily activities that we are told is causing climate change. One minute you think you are doing the right thing (like buying local food) and then an expert points out that it depends what time of year you are buying it, what country is comes from, if it was grown in a greenhouse or not, what energy sources were used, whether it come it by road, rail or air, how you got to the shop and how you prepared it (oven, boiled or fried).

All this needless to say is a) disconcerting and b) a complete waste of our time c) ineffective way to deal with global warming.

The alternative promoted by economists and endorsed by some politicians is to price carbon. This means raising the price on carbon to account for its environmental damage. This will change the relative price of energy in favour of low carbon technologies and energy conservation measures. Whilst most agree that this is a good idea (some industry groups disagree), there is disagreement about whether a carbon tax or cap and trade emissions scheme is the best approach. I will leave it to the chief proponents of these respective economic instruments to argue which is the best approach.

Greg Mankiw of Harvard University on carbon taxes as the best approach to reduce carbon emissions and Robert Stavins also of Harvard on cap and trade.

No comments: