free hit counter
klimaschutz / Loesungsansaetze - Politik
 | 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Loesungsansaetze - Politik

Page history last edited by Maiken Winter 15 years, 9 months ago

 Siehe auch Weltinnenpolitik unter Loesungsansaetze - Philosophie und Religion

 

Cap and trade and carbon tax - see below

 


Politik allgemein

 

Klimaschutzpolitik: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimaschutzpolitik 

 

Loesungsansaetzte in der Politik: http://www.wwf.de/unsere-themen/klimaschutz/loesungsansaetze/politikfelder/


 

Kosmopolis

Wir müssen den Weltfrieden auf Weltrecht bauen, auf dem Weg zu einer demokratischen Welföderation.

 

Ist das eine Utopie? Keine Frage, selbstverständlich ist das eine Utopie. Viele Utopien von gestern sind heute Realität, positive wie negative. Betrachten wir nur den Zustand Europas um 1900 im Vergleich zu 2000. Schauen wir uns die Welt von heute an. Wie wird sie 2100 aussehen? Die Geschichte geht weiter. Richtung und Verlauf wird zum größten Teil von uns Menschen verursacht. Natürlich gibt es Ereignisse, wie z.B. Naturkatastrophen, auf die wir Menschen nur wenig Einfluss haben.

 

Die größten Katastrophen wurden jedoch von uns selber gemacht. Im letzten Jahrhundert waren es zwei Weltkriege. Anschließend folgte der so genannte Kalte Krieg. Während Ost und West unter der atomaren Glocke in „Frieden“ erstarrten, wütete er Jahrzehnte lang heiß in unzähligen Stellvertreterkriegen rund um den Globus. Nun haben wir einen neuen Krieg. Es soll ein Kampf der zivilisierten Welt gegen den barbarischen Terrorismus sein. Aber kommt man mit Gegenterror gegen Terror weiter? Mutet es nicht eher an wie Schnaps gegen Alkoholismus? Wie lange noch soll das so weiter gehen?

 

Suchen wir nach besseren Wegen!

 


Politik - Deutschland

 

Eine Zusammenfassung ist beim Umweltbundesamt zu finden.

 

Die bayerische SPD verlangt staerkeren klimaschutz: http://www.spd-landtag.de/aktuell/presse_anzeigen.cfm?mehr=2718

Politik in bayern: http://www.bayern.de/Politik/welcome.html

 

 


Politik - USA

 

The Climate Registry

34 U.S. states, 2 Canadian provinces, and 2 Native American nation establish a single, unified GHG emissions accounting system

http://www.wri.org/climate/topic_content.cfm?cid=4460

 

US climate bill calls for emission caps: http://www.nature.com/news/2007/071018/full/news.2007.179.html

 

Rep. Edward Markey was appointed by Speaker Pelosi as Chairman of the new Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming at the beginning of the 110th Congress. Mr. Markey has long been active on energy and environmental issues, reflecting his commitment to maintaining the quality of life and economic opportunity in New England. The president of the League of Conservation Voters has said of the chairman "there is no greater environmental champion in Congress than Ed Markey as we fight to head off the looming catastrophe of climate change."

 

 


Cap and trade

 

Union of Concerned Scientists: We Need a Well-Designed Cap-and-Trade Program to Fight Global Warming

 


Carbon tax

 

Here are great reasons FOR a carbon tax, summarized by Sylvester Johnson, Ithaca

Model resolution in support of a federal carbon tax

A sample draft resolution for the City Council follows, available as a model that can be modified as desired with low time commitment. (All the numbered paragraph formats can get changed to plain, un-numbered, with one keystroke for the final version.) The resolution contains many "Whereas" points so that members voting for it can have at hand a menu of possible responses to questions, and so that the resolution can be self-explanatory, at least as an outline. References for definitions, detailed background information, examples and analysis follow the resolution.

 

Whereas:

1)Legislation at the federal level is being considered for reductions in heat-trapping emissions of carbon dioxide, with the primary methods for motivating reductions being either a federal carbon tax or emissions trading, and

 

2)Whereas the outcome of this legislative debate will substantially affect residents of the City of Ithaca for decades, and

 

3)Whereas the cost of trading in emissions of carbon dioxide spreads throughout the economy like a tax, yet emissions trading increases expense significantly beyond that of an actual tax due to income extracted by intermediaries such as traders and brokers, due to detailed participation by attorneys, as well as due to an extensive regulatory and oversight bureaucracy, and due to overhead and infrastructure for all the above, so that emissions trading costs society substantially more than an actual tax, and

 

4)Whereas the volatility of trading in permits to pollute will likely prove a deterrent to investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, because emissions trading increases energy cost uncertainty, in turn making returns on investments more uncertain, and

 

5)Whereas offsets are challenging for quantification of emissions reduced and for reliable verification of fulfillment of the goal for each offset, and

 

6)Whereas many offsets actually build in warming by applying the carbon dioxide saved by the offset over the many years of the lifetime of the offset against the current year’s emissions, instead of applying the current year’s reduction by the offset against the current year’s emissions, and

 

7)Whereas many offsets create other counterproductive unintended effects or would have been constructed anyway, even without extra funding, such as hydropower projects that already have been planned, and

 

8)Whereas offsets undermine the U.S. economy due to potentially high volume purchases of inexpensive offsets from abroad, worsening the balance of trade and sending jobs abroad, and

 

9)Whereas effective action requires reducing emissions at the source, not trading off the pressure to reduce emissions, and

 

10)Whereas the potentially useful feature of emissions trading is that the overall total amount of permits to pollute shrinks over time according to a regulatory goal, but that feature gets negated whenever the price of permits to pollute exceeds a set “stop price” “safety valve”, in which case the government sells more permits at that price to maintain the price at that level, so that the total amount of permits is no longer determined by the regulatory goal, and

 

11)Whereas the analogy made to trading in emissions of sulfur dioxide to reduce acid rain is not applicable due to the limited number of coal-burning power plants that practice trading in emissions of sulfur dioxide, compared to the diverse sources of fossil fuels and emissions of carbon dioxide that would make emissions trading unwieldy, and

 

12)Whereas a straightforward federal carbon tax is projected by many economists (see references) to be more effective than unwieldy emissions trading at achieving reductions in fossil fuel usage, and at motivating investments in the U.S. in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources that would create jobs in the U.S. and stimulate the economy, and

 

13)Whereas the European experiment in cap-trade has been called a failure (see references) in part due to export of responsibility to reduce emissions with the purchase of possibly questionable offsets from abroad, providing historical evidence that cap-trade may work substantially less effectively than a federal carbon tax, and

 

14)Whereas a tax achieves goals for reduction of emissions by applying judiciously adjusted price-demand modeling as a public policy tool, because as price increases, demand decreases. Using this well-developed modeling, the fixed tax rate for each year gets determined by the goal for reduction in usage of fossil fuels, without the continual price volatility of permit trading, and

 

15)Whereas the annual goals for reduction of emissions could be mapped out for decades, for example to ultimately achieve at least 80% reduction from the emissions of 1990 by 2050 as advised by climate scientists, and

 

16)Whereas a federal carbon tax levied upstream (at the sources close to extraction or import of fossil fuels) will minimize the number of entities directly taxed and the expense of monitoring compliance, and

 

17)Whereas the major part of the proceeds of a tax could be refunded in a progressive manner as equal dividends to every citizen or as an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit, stimulating the economy, and

 

18)Whereas part of the tax proceeds could fund meritorious projects in the U.S such as energy conservation and the production of energy from renewable sources, creating “green” jobs and supporting local economies, and

 

19)Whereas the competitive position of the U.S. could be maintained by imposing a border tax tariff on products imported from countries without a carbon tax, and

 

20)Whereas a carbon tax could be accepted more widely for a worldwide protocol than emissions trading since each country’s revenue from a tax would remain in that country with minimal impact from foreign countries on national sovereignty, and

 

21)Whereas both labor and business have reasons outlined above to support a federal carbon tax over emissions trading, so that once the merits of a tax become better known it could soon become politically possible, and

 

22)Whereas the Mayors for Climate Protection organization (www.coolmayors.com) has supported Mayors nationwide in their efforts to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets (7% reduction from 1990 levels by 2012) in their own communities, and

 

23)Whereas for the above environmental and economic reasons a federal carbon tax in all probability would be substantially more effective and less expensive than emissions trading, now therefore be it

 

Resolved that the City Council declares its support for enactment of a federal carbon tax, to be levied upstream, with a majority of revenues directed to income tax rebates, and be it further

 

Resolved that the City Clerk notify and send copies of this resolution to the Director of the United States Conference of Mayors, 1620 Eye Street, Northwest-Washington, DC 20006, (202) 861-6700 fax (202) 293-2352, and to Sylvester Johnson, Ph.D., Coordinator of the initiative for local governments’ resolutions in support of a federal carbon tax, www.climatehealth.net/ Contact .html, or P.O. Box 146, Brooktondale NY USA 14817-0146, and to the followingofficials:

•United States Senator ... Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510, (202) …

•United States Senator ... Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510, (202) …

•United States Representative … Rayburn H.O.B., Washington, DC 20515, (202) …

• … State Assemblymember … Legislative Office Building, State Capital

  1. •… State Senator … Legislative Office Building, State Capital
  2. •Deputy Secretary for the Environment, Office of the Secretary to the Governor, State Capital

 

References

•For definitions, detailed background information,examples and analysis: “Carbon Trading and Offsets Counterproductive Compared to Politically Possible Carbon Tax” by Sylvester Johnson, Ph.D. Applied Physics www.climatehealth.net/ ArticleCarbonTax .html

•Questions regarding the issues described herein: Sylvester Johnson, Ph.D. www.climatehealth.net/ Contact .htmlDonated phone consultation is available.

•A comprehensive resource on tax versus trade: www.carbontax.org/issues/ carbon-taxes -vs-cap-and-trade

  1. •“Should We Abandon Cap and Trade in Favor of a CO2 Tax?” by Ian W.H. Parry, Ph.D. Economics, Resources for the Future RFF, Summer 2007 (166) www.rff.org/Documents/RFF-Resources-166_ShouldWeAbandonCapAndTrade.pdf
  2. •Analysis of results of computer modeling of a tax/refund approach to energy policy www.epi.org/content.cfm/studies_cleanenergyandjobs.
  3. •The failings of the European experiment with cap-trade: “Climate Change: Caps vs. Taxes” by Kenneth P. Green for the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.26286/pub_detail.asp.
  4. •Price-demand modeling: “Fiscal Interactions and the Case for Carbon Taxes over Grandfathered Carbon Permits” by Ian W.H. Parry, Ph.D. Economics, Resources for the Future RFF 2003 www.rff.org/Documents/RFF-DP-03-46.pdf.

Respectfully submitted by …

Climate Change Action Group of …


If you are in favor of a carbon tax, then please help this great initiative:

 

Initiative for local governments resolution in support of a federal carbon tax

       This initiative does not require your money or much time, only

an average of an hour a week to contact elected officials to keep the

resolution on the agenda. The only training required is reading the

background information linked below.

       After passage, the resolution requires no further commitment

on the part of advocates or the local government. Yet this relatively

easy political action publicizes the benefits of a federal carbon tax.

       The debate between a tax and emissions trading may seem remote

from daily life, but the outcome will affect citizens for decades.

New York City is also remote from Washington, however Mayor Michael

Bloomberg has declared his support for a federal carbon tax, as have

many economists both liberal and conservative. One reason for this

broad-based support is that a cap-trade in heat-trapping emissions

acts like a disguised tax, but trading is more expensive and at the

same time less effective for emissions reduction, and more readily

abused than an actual tax.

       Without a maximum permit to stop price, trading makes energy

costs too volatile. With a stop price, selling extra permits to

pollute blows off the regulatory cap. Both results of cap-auction are

counterproductive for the goal of reducing heat-trapping emissions.

       Many local governments may hope to sell offsets in emissions

trading to help fund projects that reduce heat-trapping emissions.

However, the value of those projects may get undercut by competition

from inexpensive offsets from abroad.

       A federal carbon tax is less expensive as well as more

effective and simpler than trading.

       To find out further reasons to support a new tax, please see

the non-profit initiative for a federal carbon tax at the

"Initiative" page of www.climatehealth.net/Initiative.html. Also

available from that page is a free sample resolution with enough

points included so that it's self-explanatory, as well as detailed

background information, examples and analysis. The resolution could

be modified as desired with little time commitment.

       Advocates from across the nation are being sought to volunteer

for this initiative for local governments resolutions in support of a

federal carbon tax. In a matter of months, hundreds of local

governments could pass versions of this resolution, sending a strong

signal to the federal government that a carbon tax is politically

possible.

       Could you volunteer an hour a week to work with a local

government on this initiative for a few months? Do you know anyone

who might? Please check out the above link or forward this email.

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.