It's a start though. It makes the CO2 use visible and transparent. I reckon so many people would care a lot about carbon in electricity if their itemised power bill included a fat slice of 'carbon'. Suddenly there would be pressure to decarbonise etc. Large companies could optimise their (significant at scale) bill for carbon use. Do the PCs really have to run 24/7 for example?
It's the old 'you cannot improve what you cannot measure'.
I think the GP was that many things happen outside the normal consumer flow and the choices of impeach individual have a minimum direct impact.
Also, I’m not sure just forwarding the CO2 tax to the consumer is the best way to go, it still puts to responsibilities with the consumers instead of everyone.
Passing the CO2 tax to the consumer is exactly the solution.
In the UK we had a sugar tax. Soft drinks were taxed by the amount of sugar inside. Practically overnight it became impossible to buy drinks containing more sugar than the tax minimum limit. It wasn't illegal to sell them, but no corporation would waste money on a silly thing like taste.
The point is that the profit motive that has got us into this mess, can get us out of it too. Price in the externalities.
> Practically overnight it became impossible to buy drinks containing more sugar than the tax minimum limit. It wasn't illegal to sell them, but no corporation would waste money on a silly thing like taste.
Oh yes. Poland introduced a sugar tax recently, and I've never seen so many low-sugar offerings in the shops in my life. Marketing people of course got to work spinning this; a well-known brand of fruity beverages that advertises to children suddenly started highlighting how their products are healthy for children because they're sugar free. That's despite the fact that until few months earlier, they were the symbol of sugar-full beverages for children.
This is to say, profit motive is reality and sanity-bending, it should definitely be put to use through carbon taxation.
Yes, there it worked because there is a good alternative, healthier and same price, readily available.
There are many products on which society depend where the alternatives will have a similar CO2 footprint. Taxing these products will only serve to increase the base price.
Edit: I suppose what I mean to say is that adding a co2 tax shouldn’t become an issue for the lower incomes by raising prices while more well off persons can circumvent it somehow, further increasing the gap between poor and rich.
Small changes to personal consumption are not the best way to contribute to fighting climate change. A significantly more effective actionstep would be to donate a small portion of your income to highly effective climate charities [1].
I'm not against changing personal consumption - for example, I went vegan. But this is not where the majority of my impact on the world lies, as even a small donation vastly outweighs the effect that my veganism has.
Not sure what solutions that group is supposed to be espoucing but they're mostly just a political lobbying group.
Frankly until the shouting and arguing stops and someone who can make a difference comes to the table I'm out.
There is was too much posturing which makes no difference and is bad on both sides from plastic signs complaining about pollution to politicians who travel from ecological disaster to ecological disaster via private jet, and that's even before you realise just how in the pocket mainstream politicians of both sides are to the current status quo.
Of course they are a political lobbying group! No shame in that, if they weren't they would be stupid.
Shouting and arguing is how human beings deliberate since the beginning of our species - and it's how plenty of things have gotten done historically.
Waiting until your age of enlightened and reasoned debate around climate issues comes ensures that you never have to take action at all, which, I suspect, might be your point.
Action is worth a thousand words. Take it and sensible men will follow. Be the change you want to see in the world not the people arguing about it.
Take public transport. Repair rather than discard. Take up a new skill and improve a thing rather than buying a new one.
Reduce you own energy footprint (frankly given how at turns into more money in your pocket this should be common sense not a talking point among midwits).
I'm not talking about going off the grid and living off turnips. Make 90% changes and then share these with others to enable and empower them to do the same.
> Shouting and arguing is how human beings deliberate since the beginning of our species - and it's how plenty of things have gotten done historically.
What if humanity has run into a problem where that is not enough to solve the problem? What if the true (but unknowable) state of affairs is that our traditional ways of communicating, even at their best, are not enough?
What if it's even worse, what if our traditional ways of collective decision making are also not enough? Or even more worse, what if the very way we traditionally think must be improved adequately in order to adequately address this problem?
As a thought experiment, imagine that these premises are literally true...what shall we do? What are some plausibly adequate responses to this set of problems?
350.org have done a bunch of stuff — as for plastic signs complaining about pollution. Yes that's annoying, (it annoys me that 350.org's website is incredibly bad for environment https://www.websitecarbon.com/website/350-org/)
If you want to make a difference, do something local. That's where the biggest shifts are happening — and you're unlikely to encounter any real arguments. People tend to only have those arguments when they have an audience, e.g. Twitter, TV
Reuse, repurpose and repair everything that just requires some effort or to learn a new skill.
Buy less plastics and vote with your wallet.
Use public transport (big one here which America seems reluctant to adopt)
Focus your effort on 90% changes that make the 90% impact for the 10% time, rather than wasting time searching for the 10% that costs the 90% of time and effort.
Be the change you want to see. Back groups who aren't being controversial and getting famous for shouting at idiots and back the companies developing new useful tech to turn a profit based on the above.
Nothing changes people's minds better than clear action and benefit. It's louder and better than hundreds of hours of arguing.
So. Yes. My principles are intact. My money and foot are behind them.
And yes, with popularists in charge who will avoid talking about China except to cover their own failings yes, we're all doomed.
Just look for me, I'll be one of the last ones with the light still on making soup in the end.
By all means do those things. But if you want to make a real difference you need to look beyond your own activities.
Change your community, your company, your industry. What can you do that changes the defaults for everyone else? Try and find low-hanging fruit.
Join your local climate activist group e.g. 350.org — they'll be full of people with solutions.