Possible tax on carbon usage...

[lizard_lover]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/01/07/climate-report.html
I know some people who will be VERY happy about this...(including myself)

[rhiley_08j]

Correct me if I am wrong. in all seriousness because I might be missing something, but the most predominant message I got from that article is Money. The Liberals are considering a policy that will tax industry on the amount of carbon they pollute. Basically, making sure that they get their hand in the pot before it's too late. Or the way they would like it to be percieved as "hitting them where it hurts". Whereas, the Conservatives are pushing to make industry accountable by forcing them to reduce their carbon emmisions rather than try to make money off of it. It seems that the way the Liberals plan it, they would almost want carbon emmisions to be high, cause wouldn't that mean that they would have higher tax revenue?

[dan j]

kinda wrong. in the best application of this system, companies who reduce their carbon output will be able to take advantage of these credits/taxes. so, companies who do not comply lose money and companies who comply will make more money. the money basically gets recycled and those who are better for the environment get incentives thus pressuring all companies to want to make more money; become more environmentally friendly. in my opinion, this is the only way to make companies accountable is to create competition for them to want to make more money. just asking them or forcing them to reduce carbon emissions is not going to work.

[rhiley_08j]

Oh ok, see I thought maybe I was missing something. However, if is was made law that they had to reduce their carbon emmisions and if they didn't comply they would be forced out of business, wouldn't that deter them as well, knowing that they would no longer be able to operate.

[dan j]

Yeah, but some would argue (myself included) that the carbon credit system would be better for business and better for the environment.

[rhiley_08j]

Ok, with no arguing intended, but how would making money off the situation be better for the environment, rather than simply making it outright illegal to do business that is harming the environment? It seems like a very simple solution to me, don't allow it to happen.

[dan j]

Good question. I don't think I can fully give a great answer but I'll answer based on how I think of it. Not allowing it doesn't mean companies will comply. They'll just pay the fine or have it drag out in court for months/years and in the end, nothing really happens and they'll continue to pollute. Sound familiar? If a company had to pay the carbon credits they'd obviously not be getting any but their competitors will be getting carbon credits and thus making them more competitive. The competitive spirit (with a little bit of intervention) seems like it will work better than complete intervention.

[rhiley_08j]

Yeah maybe, but I think if they just got a little tougher on the law and made it so that it was a black and white issue, no if, ands, or buts, than it would be done. For example, if someone was in business doing illegal activities, they are quick enough to shut them down if they are doing it visibly. They can monitor their carbon emmisions, and if they go over the limit imposed on them they should automatically be forced to shut down. Problem solved, but of course that would be too simple and will never happen.

[dan j]

what would happen to the workers of that facility if the place is shut down for a medium or long term while they have to upgrade to meet the law?

[rhiley_08j]

yeah that's a valid point but what happens if they don't and there is no environment left to work in. I am not saying you are wrong, because I would be one of those people that would be out of work, but a line has to be drawn at some point. There comes a point when we have to stop worrying so much about today, and start worrying about whether or not tommorrow will be here.