Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.
Debate: Cap-and-trade versus carbon tax
From Debatepedia
(Difference between revisions)
Revision as of 15:28, 6 September 2009 (edit) Monemy (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 15:29, 6 September 2009 (edit) Monemy (Talk | contribs) Next diff → |
||
Line 78: | Line 78: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | ===Reducing emissions: Is a cap-and-trade system better at reducing carbon emissions than a carbon tax?=== | + | ===Feasibility: Is a market-based cap-and-trade system more feasible than a carbon tax?=== |
|- | |- | ||
|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
====Yes==== | ====Yes==== | ||
- | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system better encourages companies to cut their carbon emissions| A cap-and-trade system better encourages companies to cut their carbon emissions]]: A cap-and-trade system provides companies with credits if they are able to reduce their emissions below an established level. They can then sell these credits for a profit. So, if a company takes action to reduce its carbon emissions below the designated level, than it can make a profit. This is a powerful market incentive that is more likely to cause companies to invest money in finding ways to reduce their carbon emissions. A carbon tax, conversely, only provides the incentive of cutting costs, and does not offer this important profit motive. | ||
- | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is certain to reduce emissions, which is important in context of the global warming crisis| A cap-and-trade system is certain to reduce emissions, which is important in context of the global warming crisis]]: [http://www.terrapass.com/terrablog/posts/2006/08/carbon-tax-vs-carbon-market-who-would-win-in-a-fight.html "Carbon tax vs. carbon market: who would win in a fight?", 9/15/06] - "In a cap-and-trade carbon market, total emissions are guaranteed to go down. The cap is the cap, and assuming some reasonably effective enforcement mechanism, not a pound more carbon can be emitted. A carbon tax, on the other hand, merely encourages people to emit less by making it more expensive to do so. And in the case of fossil fuels, people seem perversely resistant to financial incentives." | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax is less popular and harder to achieve politically| A carbon tax is less popular and harder to achieve politically]]: The basic problem is that a carbon tax would be a new tax on the public. New taxes are typically unpopular. This makes it hard for politicians to support a carbon tax, as they are beholden to their constituents, and their likely desires to avoid such a tax. |
- | **[http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/04/carbon-tax-problem.html A post made on economist Greg Mankiw's Blog 4/11/07] - "With the cap-and-trade system, there will be a definite decrease in emissions, while with the tax, the decrease depends on whether the cost of cutting emissions is lower than the potential tax. If it is, emissions decrease, if not, there is no effect." | + | |
- | *'''The market does a better job of directing investments in the best green technologies:''' **[http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/2/12/102851/837 Bill Chameides, Chief Scientist at Environmental Defense, "Cap-and-trade: more effective than a carbon tax", Grist.org, February 12, 2007] - "Subsidizing one or two targeted technologies with a carbon tax would discourage investment in others that may turn out to be more effective. Which technologies should receive these tax dollars? No one has a crystal ball that can determine for sure which will turn out to be most useful. History has shown that the marketplace does a better job of developing new technologies, and a tax takes money out of the marketplace. The solution is cap-and-trade. A cap-and-trade strategy provides the incentive for all segments of the economy to compete to discover the best ways to cut emissions." | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would also require complicated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms| A carbon tax would also require complicated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms]] In a carbon tax, emitters would pay a tax for every ton of carbon emitted. This requires that the government know precisely how much carbon is being emitted by energy producers. This is not easy to determine, and requires that a government put in place monitoring mechanisms. Deploying these mechanisms universally would be very complicated, expensive, and require much administration. Then, ensuring that all these monitoring devices operate properly and that all energy producers comply with the tax would also involve a substantial administrative burden. This would be equally as complicated as a cap-and-trade system. |
+ | ''Click "edit" and help research and write arguments on Debatepedia.'' | ||
- | |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | ====No==== | ||
- | *[http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1191728697 Carbon trading schemes rely on bureaucratic processes to actually reduce emissions.] Tax schemes direct the power of market forces towards reducing emissions, rather than merely reducing the price of emissions. Market mechanisms will work far faster. | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would add a clear cost to polluting and create a market incentive to pollute less| A carbon tax would add a clear cost to polluting and create a market incentive to pollute less]] | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax sends a serious and important message about the will to fight global warming| A carbon tax sends a serious and important message about the will to fight global warming]] | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would shock consumers into needed behavioral changes| A carbon tax would shock consumers into needed behavioral changes]] | + | |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax addresses carbon emissions in all industries| A carbon tax addresses carbon emissions in all industries]]: [http://www.carbontax.org/issues/carbon-taxes-vs-cap-and-trade/ Carbon Tax Center, "Carbon Taxes vs. Cap and Trade"] - "Carbon taxes address emissions of carbon from every sector, whereas cap-and-trade systems have only targeted the electricity industry, which accounts for less than 40% of emissions."''' | + | ====No==== |
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would create funds to support environmentally-friendly policies| A carbon tax would create funds to support environmentally-friendly policies]] | + | *[[Argument:The transparency and clarity of a carbon tax is attractive politically| The transparency and clarity of a carbon tax is attractive politically]] |
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax provides better incentives for green innovation| A carbon tax provides better incentives for green innovation]] | + | *[[Argument:The slow implementation of a cap-and-trade system may make it unpopular over time| The slow implementation of a cap-and-trade system may make it unpopular over time]] |
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax can be implemented immediately| A carbon tax can be implemented immediately]] While a cap-and-trade system may take a long time to take effect, a carbon tax can be implemented immediately. Due to the urgency of the Global Warming problem, the rapid results of a carbon tax are very important | + | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system demands the creation of a large and highly complicated administrative bureaucracy| A cap-and-trade system demands the creation of a large and highly complicated administrative bureaucracy]]: A cap-and-trade system demands that the government determine the emissions baselines for companies, the allocation of carbon credits, and the monitoring and enforcement of this all. This is a major administrative burden. A carbon tax would be simpler and require less oversight. |
- | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is vulnerable to companies tricking the system by polluting heavily before the system begins| A cap-and-trade system is vulnerable to companies tricking the system by polluting heavily before the system begins]]: The main problem is that baseline emission allowances for companies are based on their past emissions. For this reason, a company has the incentive to emit as much as possible when these baselines are being set so that the baseline is above or at what the company is already emitting. If a company successfully tricks the system in this way, they will be able to emit carbon as they had before, with no reductions being achieved. | + | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is more susceptible to corruption than a carbon tax| A cap-and-trade system is more susceptible to corruption than a carbon tax]]: The complexity of a cap-and-trade system would make it easier for companies to cheat. This is largely because the enforcement of this system would be difficult. |
+ | |||
+ | *[[Argument:Governments within a cap-and-trade system have the incentive to "cheat"| Governments within a cap-and-trade system have the incentive to "cheat"]]: Governments have the incentive to establish conditions favorable to the performance of their own national companies. They can do so by, for example, offering more carbon credits than they should to the companies of their country. The EU's emissions trading system is the primary example of this occurring. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is susceptible to distortion by lobby groups| A cap-and-trade system is susceptible to distortion by lobby groups]] | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax obligates participation, whereas participating in a cap-and-trade system is largely optional| A carbon tax obligates participation, whereas participating in a cap-and-trade system is largely optional]]: A carbon tax is an "opt-out" program, where all companies are obligated to participate unless taking specific steps to avoid it. A cap-and-trade system is an "opt-in" program, conversely, where companies are not obligated to participate unless they specifically take steps to "opt-in" and participate. This difference makes the carbon tax more imposing and likely to achieve results. | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax can be easily adjusted over time to achieve desired emissions results| A carbon tax can be easily adjusted over time to achieve desired emissions results]]: | ||
- | *[[Argument:Cap-and-trade system don't ensure local area carbon emissions are reduced| Cap-and-trade system don't ensure local area carbon emissions are reduced]]: | ||
Line 125: | Line 120: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | ===Feasibility: Is a market-based cap-and-trade system more feasible than a carbon tax?=== | + | ===Reducing emissions: Is a cap-and-trade system better at reducing carbon emissions than a carbon tax?=== |
|- | |- | ||
|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
====Yes==== | ====Yes==== | ||
+ | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system better encourages companies to cut their carbon emissions| A cap-and-trade system better encourages companies to cut their carbon emissions]]: A cap-and-trade system provides companies with credits if they are able to reduce their emissions below an established level. They can then sell these credits for a profit. So, if a company takes action to reduce its carbon emissions below the designated level, than it can make a profit. This is a powerful market incentive that is more likely to cause companies to invest money in finding ways to reduce their carbon emissions. A carbon tax, conversely, only provides the incentive of cutting costs, and does not offer this important profit motive. | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax is less popular and harder to achieve politically| A carbon tax is less popular and harder to achieve politically]]: The basic problem is that a carbon tax would be a new tax on the public. New taxes are typically unpopular. This makes it hard for politicians to support a carbon tax, as they are beholden to their constituents, and their likely desires to avoid such a tax. | + | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is certain to reduce emissions, which is important in context of the global warming crisis| A cap-and-trade system is certain to reduce emissions, which is important in context of the global warming crisis]]: [http://www.terrapass.com/terrablog/posts/2006/08/carbon-tax-vs-carbon-market-who-would-win-in-a-fight.html "Carbon tax vs. carbon market: who would win in a fight?", 9/15/06] - "In a cap-and-trade carbon market, total emissions are guaranteed to go down. The cap is the cap, and assuming some reasonably effective enforcement mechanism, not a pound more carbon can be emitted. A carbon tax, on the other hand, merely encourages people to emit less by making it more expensive to do so. And in the case of fossil fuels, people seem perversely resistant to financial incentives." |
+ | **[http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/04/carbon-tax-problem.html A post made on economist Greg Mankiw's Blog 4/11/07] - "With the cap-and-trade system, there will be a definite decrease in emissions, while with the tax, the decrease depends on whether the cost of cutting emissions is lower than the potential tax. If it is, emissions decrease, if not, there is no effect." | ||
- | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would also require complicated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms| A carbon tax would also require complicated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms]] In a carbon tax, emitters would pay a tax for every ton of carbon emitted. This requires that the government know precisely how much carbon is being emitted by energy producers. This is not easy to determine, and requires that a government put in place monitoring mechanisms. Deploying these mechanisms universally would be very complicated, expensive, and require much administration. Then, ensuring that all these monitoring devices operate properly and that all energy producers comply with the tax would also involve a substantial administrative burden. This would be equally as complicated as a cap-and-trade system. | + | *'''The market does a better job of directing investments in the best green technologies:''' **[http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/2/12/102851/837 Bill Chameides, Chief Scientist at Environmental Defense, "Cap-and-trade: more effective than a carbon tax", Grist.org, February 12, 2007] - "Subsidizing one or two targeted technologies with a carbon tax would discourage investment in others that may turn out to be more effective. Which technologies should receive these tax dollars? No one has a crystal ball that can determine for sure which will turn out to be most useful. History has shown that the marketplace does a better job of developing new technologies, and a tax takes money out of the marketplace. The solution is cap-and-trade. A cap-and-trade strategy provides the incentive for all segments of the economy to compete to discover the best ways to cut emissions." |
- | ''Click "edit" and help research and write arguments on Debatepedia.'' | ||
+ | |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
+ | ====No==== | ||
+ | *[http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1191728697 Carbon trading schemes rely on bureaucratic processes to actually reduce emissions.] Tax schemes direct the power of market forces towards reducing emissions, rather than merely reducing the price of emissions. Market mechanisms will work far faster. | ||
+ | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would add a clear cost to polluting and create a market incentive to pollute less| A carbon tax would add a clear cost to polluting and create a market incentive to pollute less]] | ||
+ | *[[Argument:A carbon tax sends a serious and important message about the will to fight global warming| A carbon tax sends a serious and important message about the will to fight global warming]] | ||
- | |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would shock consumers into needed behavioral changes| A carbon tax would shock consumers into needed behavioral changes]] |
- | ====No==== | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax addresses carbon emissions in all industries| A carbon tax addresses carbon emissions in all industries]]: [http://www.carbontax.org/issues/carbon-taxes-vs-cap-and-trade/ Carbon Tax Center, "Carbon Taxes vs. Cap and Trade"] - "Carbon taxes address emissions of carbon from every sector, whereas cap-and-trade systems have only targeted the electricity industry, which accounts for less than 40% of emissions."''' |
- | *[[Argument:The transparency and clarity of a carbon tax is attractive politically| The transparency and clarity of a carbon tax is attractive politically]] | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax would create funds to support environmentally-friendly policies| A carbon tax would create funds to support environmentally-friendly policies]] |
- | *[[Argument:The slow implementation of a cap-and-trade system may make it unpopular over time| The slow implementation of a cap-and-trade system may make it unpopular over time]] | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax provides better incentives for green innovation| A carbon tax provides better incentives for green innovation]] |
- | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system demands the creation of a large and highly complicated administrative bureaucracy| A cap-and-trade system demands the creation of a large and highly complicated administrative bureaucracy]]: A cap-and-trade system demands that the government determine the emissions baselines for companies, the allocation of carbon credits, and the monitoring and enforcement of this all. This is a major administrative burden. A carbon tax would be simpler and require less oversight. | + | *[[Argument:A carbon tax can be implemented immediately| A carbon tax can be implemented immediately]] While a cap-and-trade system may take a long time to take effect, a carbon tax can be implemented immediately. Due to the urgency of the Global Warming problem, the rapid results of a carbon tax are very important |
- | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is more susceptible to corruption than a carbon tax| A cap-and-trade system is more susceptible to corruption than a carbon tax]]: The complexity of a cap-and-trade system would make it easier for companies to cheat. This is largely because the enforcement of this system would be difficult. | + | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is vulnerable to companies tricking the system by polluting heavily before the system begins| A cap-and-trade system is vulnerable to companies tricking the system by polluting heavily before the system begins]]: The main problem is that baseline emission allowances for companies are based on their past emissions. For this reason, a company has the incentive to emit as much as possible when these baselines are being set so that the baseline is above or at what the company is already emitting. If a company successfully tricks the system in this way, they will be able to emit carbon as they had before, with no reductions being achieved. |
- | + | ||
- | *[[Argument:Governments within a cap-and-trade system have the incentive to "cheat"| Governments within a cap-and-trade system have the incentive to "cheat"]]: Governments have the incentive to establish conditions favorable to the performance of their own national companies. They can do so by, for example, offering more carbon credits than they should to the companies of their country. The EU's emissions trading system is the primary example of this occurring. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | *[[Argument:A cap-and-trade system is susceptible to distortion by lobby groups| A cap-and-trade system is susceptible to distortion by lobby groups]] | + | |
+ | *[[Argument:A carbon tax obligates participation, whereas participating in a cap-and-trade system is largely optional| A carbon tax obligates participation, whereas participating in a cap-and-trade system is largely optional]]: A carbon tax is an "opt-out" program, where all companies are obligated to participate unless taking specific steps to avoid it. A cap-and-trade system is an "opt-in" program, conversely, where companies are not obligated to participate unless they specifically take steps to "opt-in" and participate. This difference makes the carbon tax more imposing and likely to achieve results. | ||
+ | *[[Argument:A carbon tax can be easily adjusted over time to achieve desired emissions results| A carbon tax can be easily adjusted over time to achieve desired emissions results]]: | ||
+ | *[[Argument:Cap-and-trade system don't ensure local area carbon emissions are reduced| Cap-and-trade system don't ensure local area carbon emissions are reduced]]: | ||
Line 167: | Line 167: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | |||
==="Progressive"? Is a cap-and-trade system more "progressive" than a carbon tax, and would this be a good thing?=== | ==="Progressive"? Is a cap-and-trade system more "progressive" than a carbon tax, and would this be a good thing?=== | ||
Revision as of 15:29, 6 September 2009
Is a cap-and-trade system preferable to a carbon tax in reducing carbon emissions? |
Economics: Are cap-and-trade markets more economical than a carbon tax? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Feasibility: Is a market-based cap-and-trade system more feasible than a carbon tax? | |
Yes
Click "edit" and help research and write arguments on Debatepedia.
|
No
|
Reducing emissions: Is a cap-and-trade system better at reducing carbon emissions than a carbon tax? | |
Yes
|
No
|
"Progressive"? Is a cap-and-trade system more "progressive" than a carbon tax, and would this be a good thing? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Fairness to producers: Is a cap-and-trade approach more fair to producers than a carbon tax? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Fairness to consumers: Would a cap-and-trade system be more fair to energy consumers? | |
Yes
|
No
|
Democratic principles: Does a cap-and-trade system better uphold democratic principles and justice? | |
Yes |
No
|
Case studies: What do the existing case studies suggest? | |
Yes
|
No
|
References:Motions:Market mechanisms are preferable to regulatory approaches in reducing carbon emissions. In legislation, policy, and the real world:See also on Debatepedia:
External links and resources:
Books: |