Federal Government Moves Forward to Fight Climate Change with Carbon Price Standards

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (05) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Pam Boschee

Carbon credits, carbon taxes, and emissions trading systems are familiar terms in discussions about limiting global warming, the Paris Agreement, and net-zero emissions goals. A more recent addition to the glossary of climate policy is “carbon tariff.” While the concept is not new, it recently surfaced in nascent policymaking in the EU. In 2019, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed a “carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)” as part of a proposed green deal. In March, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on a World Trade Organization (WTO)-compatible CBAM. A carbon tariff, or the EU’s CBAM, is a tax applied to carbon-intensive imports. Countries that have pledged to be more ambitious in reducing emissions—and in some cases have implemented binding targets—may impose carbon costs on their own businesses. Being eyed now are cross-border or overseas businesses that make products in countries in which no costs are imposed for emissions, resulting in cheaper carbon-intensive goods. Those products are exported to the countries aiming for reduced emissions. The concern lies in the risk of locally made goods becoming unfairly disadvantaged against competitors that are not taking similar steps to deal with climate change. A carbon tariff is being considered to level the playing field: local businesses in countries applying a tariff can better compete as climate policies evolve and are adopted around the world. Complying with WTO rules to ensure fair treatment, the CBAM will be imposed only on high-emitting industries that compete directly with local industries paying a carbon price. In the short term, these are likely to be steel, chemicals, fertilizers, and cement. The Parliament’s statement introduced another term to the glossary of climate policy: carbon leakage. “To raise global climate ambition and prevent ‘carbon leakage,’ the EU must place a carbon price on imports from less climate-ambitious countries.” It refers to the situation that may occur if businesses were to transfer production to other countries with laxer emission constraints to avoid costs related to climate policies. This could lead to an increase in total emissions in the higher-emitting countries. “The resolution underlines that the EU’s increased ambition on climate change must not lead to carbon leakage as global climate efforts will not benefit if EU production is just moved to non-EU countries that have less ambitious emissions rules,” the Parliament said. It also emphasized the tariff “must not be misused to further protectionism.” A member of the environment committee, Yannick Jadot, said, “It is a major political and democratic test for the EU, which must stop being naïve and impose the same carbon price on products, whether they are produced in or outside the EU, to ensure the most polluting sectors also take part in fighting climate change and innovate towards zero carbon. This will give us the best chance of remaining below the 1.5°C warming limit, whilst also pushing our trading partners to be equally ambitious in order to enter the EU market.” The Commission is expected to present a legislative proposal on a CBAM in the second quarter of 2021 as part of the European Green Deal.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sri Walyoto

This article analyzes the loss of carbon dioxide (CO2) released in the forest conversion to oil palm plantations. This research data gathered from the relevant secondary data and relate published reports. This research finds that a loss of release of carbon dioxide (CO2) per hectare of US $ 9,800 with a carbon price of USD2 of US $ 14,000 carbon price of USD3 and US $ 19,600 in carbon price of USD4. In addition, this conversion also has a significant impact on global warming (GWP) and global climate change. Keywords: oil palm plantation, CO2 release, GWP, climate change. 


2006 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus N Thormann

Canadian forests are naturally dynamic ecosystems, changing species composition and abundance as the ecosystem evolves through succession or reacts to disturbances, such as wind and insects. Pollution and climate change will be the largest stressors to Canada's forests in the future. Their future impact on the health of Canada's forests remains speculative. Lichens have been identified as valuable indicators of forest health; however, there are no comprehensive datasets on which lichens are indicative of forest health in Canada. An analysis of the existing literature reveals a large number of lichens that can be used to monitor levels of various pollutants (general pollution: 51 species; sulphur dioxide: 42 species; photochemicals: 23 species; fluoride: 18 species; heavy metals: 3 species; acid precipitation: 8 species; sulphite: 2 species; nitrate: 2 species). The use of lichens as indicators of climate change is also reported in the literature but, there are insufficient data to monitor the effects of climate change on lichen communities in North America. While various provincial and federal government departments and industries have been monitoring lichen communities across Canada for up to nearly three decades, there exists no standard monitoring protocol for lichens in Canada, which makes comparisons among studies challenging. The development of a standard monitoring protocol would allow integration of the various initiatives into a nationwide lichen monitoring program. Key words: lichens, biomonitoring, forest health, pollution, climate change


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-80
Author(s):  
Christopher Rice ◽  

A common criticism of the Green New Deal proposal to address climate change is that it would centralize too much power at the level of the federal government. However, the Green New Deal can avoid this by centering local action and decision-making in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity from Catholic social ethics. This principle holds that higher levels of society should not override the initiative of lower levels of society but should instead coordinate and support their work whenever possible. A focus on subsidiarity is already present in the framing of the Green New Deal proposal and provides a sound ethical foundation for its development and implementation.


2010 ◽  
Vol 01 (03) ◽  
pp. 209-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
SAMUEL FANKHAUSER ◽  
CAMERON HEPBURN ◽  
JISUNG PARK

Putting a price on carbon is critical for climate change policy. Increasingly, policymakers combine multiple policy tools to achieve this, for example by complementing cap-and-trade schemes with a carbon tax, or with a feed-in tariff. Often, the motivation for doing so is to limit undesirable fluctuations in the carbon price, either from rising too high or falling too low. This paper reviews the implications for the carbon price of combining cap-and-trade with other policy instruments. We find that price intervention may not always have the desired effect. Simply adding a carbon tax to an existing cap-and-trade system reduces the carbon price in the market to such an extent that the overall price signal (tax plus carbon price) may remain unchanged. Generous feed-in tariffs or renewable energy obligations within a capped area have the same effect: they undermine the carbon price in the rest of the trading regime, likely increasing costs without reducing emissions. Policymakers wishing to support carbon prices should turn to hybrid instruments — that is, trading schemes with price-like features, such as an auction reserve price — to make sure their objectives are met.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucca Henrion ◽  
Duo Zhang ◽  
Victor Li ◽  
Volker Sick

From technology to policy, the US is thinking about construction differently. The federal government is motivated to address the aging infrastructure across the country, and policy proposals are surfacing that seek green methods of performing this construction. This paper reviews the current status of concrete technology and policy to provide insight into the current state of the art. The scale of CO2 emissions from concrete production and use is elucidated. Current embodied emissions reduction methods show that action can be taken today in small and large projects alike. Additionally, developing concrete technologies offers pathways to reuse and rely on concrete for longer service lifetimes and reduce their lifetime embodied emissions. These concrete technologies must be implemented, and public procurement proves a unique tool to develop a nationwide demand signal for low embodied carbon building materials. Local governments closely interact with concrete producers, state governments oversee large infrastructure projects, and the federal government invests massively in construction. All three levels of government must coordinate for the effective rollout of low embodied carbon construction practices. Disparate policy approaches show successes and pitfalls to developing an effective construction policy that is aligned with climate. Importantly, approaches to addressing the twin challenge of climate change and crumbling infrastructure must consider the whole lifetime of the concrete. Throughout this paper, we examine the sector to highlight current practices and provide a vision for effective implementation.


Federalism-E ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-29
Author(s):  
Rebecca Teare

In 2000 Quebec was about to host its provincial counterparts for that year’s Joint Meeting of Ministers of the Environment and Energy in an effort to work in unison for the benefit of all Canadians and the environment. Quebec’s Ministers were clear about their position on climate change policy. In their province, Quebec’s policy will prevail. Federalism lies at the heart of the political dispute between Quebec and the federal government over the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. Quebec has pressured the federal government to maintain its commitments to the international community, and has been critical of its approach to meeting them. It has seriously considered the commitments Canada has made, and in the process, diverged from federal climate change policy by taking a more global perspective. This has enabled the province to generate greater provincial powers within Canada, in line with the Quebec Liberal Party’s concept of federalism. This essay will investigate climate change policy in Quebec after the Quiet Revolution, focusing on the differences between this province and the federal government’s approach to international climate change agreements—specifically the Kyoto Protocol. Quebec has developed firmer climate change policy than the federal government. While this is possible because of Quebec’s energy industry and the fact that it does not have to compromise with other jurisdictions in the federation, it has provided an additional outlet for the Quebecois sense of distinctiveness in Canada. This essay will argue that Quebec pursues a more ambitious climate change policy than the federal government in order to increase its provincial powers within the Canadian federation.[...]


2019 ◽  
pp. 273-283
Author(s):  
Shankar Venkateswaran ◽  
Mukund Rajan

This chapter provides a perspective on how the Indian private sector is responding to sustainability and climate change challenges by beginning to embrace the idea of a ‘triple bottom line’. It notes that an increasing number of Indian businesses have begun to take actions, such as increased sustainability, environmental reporting, and adoption of internal actions, including setting emission targets and an internal carbon price. However, the pace is not uniform; large companies with a global footprint, and some sectors like electricity, are moving faster than others. While, globally, this shift is due to greater pressures from regulators, investors, customers, employees, and communities, in India, regulations are the dominant external trigger, with civil society action growing in importance. While leadership companies will continue to mainstream sustainability and climate change into their core business, this process will be significantly deepened if other stakeholders—customers, investors, and employees—also push businesses.


Author(s):  
Kelly M. Twomey ◽  
Michael E. Webber

Although consensus has not been reached regarding the most efficient mechanism to curb anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, rising concern over the consequences of global climate change and consequent shifts in public and political sentiment suggest that carbon legislation will be instituted in the US in the near future. The recent climate change bill passed in the House of Representatives titled The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (HR 2454) includes provisions for a cap-and-trade system intended to reduce the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions 83% by 2050. Consequently, it is likely that some means of carbon pricing will take effect that will make it more expensive to emit greenhouse gases. In a carbon constrained economy, it will become increasingly important to consider every stage of food production and consumption in order to evaluate the potential opportunities for emission reductions. This analysis uses Life-Cycle Assessment to estimate the social cost of food production by quantifying the associated negative externalities under a range of potential carbon prices, using meat and grain as examples. It concludes that 0.42 and 16.0 kg of lifecycle CO2e are embedded in 1 kg of grain and beef production, respectively. Consequently, the marginal cost associated with the emissions caused by grain production under a carbon price range of $10 and $85 per t CO2e is estimated to be between $.004 and $0.036 per kg of grain. By comparison, the estimated marginal cost associated with beef production over the same range of carbon pricing is $0.16 and $1.36 per kg of beef. Considering that the US produces 12 billion kg of beef per year, this range indicates that the carbon cost of beef production alone might fall anywhere between $1.9 and $16.3 billion per year, depending on whether and how a carbon price is applied. This uncertainty and potential carbon price could significantly impact the cost of carbon-intensive foods.


2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark C. J. Stoddart ◽  
D. B. Tindall ◽  
Kelly L. Greenfield

The authors examine environmentalists’ attribution of responsibility for addressing climate change and their beliefs about solutions to this problem. Their analysis is based on responses to open-ended questions completed by 1,227 members of nine different environmental organizations. For these environmental movement participants, the federal government is seen as most responsible for addressing climate change. Government leadership is necessary because it has the power to set regulations and lead corporations and citizens toward pro-environmental behavior. However, a substantial number of participants also assert that “individuals are the driving force” in dealing with climate change. In this framework, individuals can take responsibility either through making lifestyle changes, or through applying pressure to government and businesses as citizens and consumers. Corporations are interpreted as unwilling to change on their own but must be coerced into becoming more environmentally sustainable by a strong state.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document