Tuesday, May 08, 2012

Heartland climate conference keeps sponsors despite billboard controversy - The Hill's E2-Wire

A small minority of scientists call data and modeling on warming trends and the human contribution inaccurate or inconclusive.

Why the answer is a carbon tax – Telegraph Blogs

[Worstall] As a made-up example: my car emits one tonne CO2 when I drive it to buy fresh bread for lunch. That's $80 of damage I cause in the future by doing so. But the benefit to me is trivial: if you paid me 50p (alright, £5 in the rain) I'd cycle instead and not emit the CO2. The value to me of driving is that 50p; the costs to someone else are the $80. Clearly, this is a bad deal for everyone else: they're bearing costs much greater than the benefit to anyone at all. An $80 a tonne tax would get me cycling and that would be a good thing: I've stopped doing something where the benefit is lower than the cost.

No comments: