Carbon Technology
Econ 339: Topic #6 Cap and Trade or Carbon Tax
Wade Wong 25967118
Catherine Douglas Econ 339 University of British Columbia November 28 2012
The progress of technology change has increased dramatically around 1960-2012, a lot has been changed for the better of the world, and some technologies do not share the same path. Many of them are disembodied technology as process of production, methods, and labour efficiency has been vastly improved. On the other hand because most production or technology involves burning resources, wastes dumping, and gas emitting, it results in global warming, which is determined to affect the future of the world. The pollution causes a negative externality not just on specific individuals, but to the whole population and environment. To solve this problem, government intervention is a necessity for firms and individuals to completely comply with the situation for the welfare of the society (Samaras). In dealing with this crisis, nations or governments had implemented plans that would help reduce the emissions emitting from power plants, buildings, appliances household, and automobiles; the plans are “cap and trade system” and “carbon tax plan” (Samaras). With the cap and trade system, the governments sets a emission target on polluters of how much emission they can produce, and grants slips to firm if they need to produce over the target emission level. For carbon tax, it is a tax imposed on users that burn fossil fuel (gas). After heavy mass productions in early years, it’s inevitable that global warming is going to happen; right now it’s whether the damage can be greatly reduced. For a effective emission reduction, nations propose carbon decline of thirty percent by 2020 and eighty percent in 2050 (Cap and Invest). Both plans are great in energy saving technology, but which is more efficient and more effective in reducing emission? From the collected data, there’s a huge indication that cap and trade system is a better
Wade Wong 25967118
Catherine Douglas Econ 339 University of British Columbia November 28 2012
The progress of technology change has increased dramatically around 1960-2012, a lot has been changed for the better of the world, and some technologies do not share the same path. Many of them are disembodied technology as process of production, methods, and labour efficiency has been vastly improved. On the other hand because most production or technology involves burning resources, wastes dumping, and gas emitting, it results in global warming, which is determined to affect the future of the world. The pollution causes a negative externality not just on specific individuals, but to the whole population and environment. To solve this problem, government intervention is a necessity for firms and individuals to completely comply with the situation for the welfare of the society (Samaras). In dealing with this crisis, nations or governments had implemented plans that would help reduce the emissions emitting from power plants, buildings, appliances household, and automobiles; the plans are “cap and trade system” and “carbon tax plan” (Samaras). With the cap and trade system, the governments sets a emission target on polluters of how much emission they can produce, and grants slips to firm if they need to produce over the target emission level. For carbon tax, it is a tax imposed on users that burn fossil fuel (gas). After heavy mass productions in early years, it’s inevitable that global warming is going to happen; right now it’s whether the damage can be greatly reduced. For a effective emission reduction, nations propose carbon decline of thirty percent by 2020 and eighty percent in 2050 (Cap and Invest). Both plans are great in energy saving technology, but which is more efficient and more effective in reducing emission? From the collected data, there’s a huge indication that cap and trade system is a better
Bibliography: Bray, Nancy, and Derek Simon. "Clearing The Air." Fusion Halifax. Fusion Halifax, n.d. Web. 14 Nov 2012. "British Columbia Carbon Tax Review." Sustainable Prosperity. University of Ottawa, n.d. Web. 14 Nov 2012. "Cap and Invest." How a Cap-and-Trade Program Can Reduce Energy Costs, Create Jobs, and Improve Energy Security. Union of Concerned Scientists, 04 2009. Web. 14 Nov 2012. http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/big_picture_solutions/cap-and-invest.html “Cap and Trade vs. Taxes” Climate Policy Memo #1:Cap and Trade vs. Taxes. Center For Climate and Energy Solutions (March 2009). Web. 14 Nov 2012 http://www.c2es.org/publications/cap-trade-vs-taxes Cayo, Don. "Cayo: Under-reported analysis shows carbon tax pays off for B.C.." Vancouver Sun. Vancouver Sun, 21 2012. Web. 14 Nov 2012. http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/story.html?id=7282461 Clive, Chapple. Economics 371. In-class Notes. Apr 2011. 14 Nov 2012. “Cogeneration”. Center For Climate and Energy Solutions. (2011): Web. 14 Nov. 2012. http://www.c2es.org/technology/factsheet/CogenerationCHP Muro, Mark, and Johnathan Rothwell, eds. "Cut To Invest." Remaking Federalism|Renewing The Economy . Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program, n.d. Web. 14 Nov 2012. http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2012/11/13 federalism/13 carbon tax.pdf Samaras, Constantine, Apt Jay, Azevedo Ines L., Lave Lester B, Granger Morgan, and Rubin Edward S.. "Cap and Trade Is Not Enough: Improving U.S. Climate Policy." . Carnegie Mellon University, n.d. Web. 14 Nov 2012. http://www.epp.cmu.edu/Publications/ClimatePolicy.pdf