Cancun policy change to support a carbon price or do we go nuclear?

Add a Comment

Comment by Michael Salvatico on December 9, 2010 at 13:04

Hi Ronnie

Thanks for your reply.

Let's consider why a carbon price is needed. A carbon price corrects an inefficient market by adding in an environmental cost factor that influences energy related investment decisions.

There are advantages and disadvantages to a carbon tax or a carbon market. Perhaps a hybrid solution (a bit of both) is ideal. John Daley from the Grattan Institute thinks so, "Best of Both Worlds".

I am a big fan of James Hansen. I saw him in Australia at the Seymour Centre in Sydney. Fantastic scientific knowledge! But let's get down the basic economics of the fee and dividend he proposes. It's a carbon tax. A fixed price applied to carbon emissions.

A carbon market has the benefits of flexibility, allowing the market to determine where and at what price emissions will be abated. The big advantage of a carbon market is that it targets the quantity of carbon emissions that can be emitted while a carbon tax dictates a carbon price in the hope that the quantity of emissions will meet the target.

I agree totally about the need for a mix of solutions. As Bill McKibben said there will need to be a number of concurrent solutions to achieve a low-carbon future.

Nuclear power can be a low-carbon alternative where renewables are not available. However, the risks of a catastrophe, the waste disposal issues and the weapons grade plutonium are all negatives that should make it a low ranked choice. A carbon price helps make it so!

Cheers
Michael

P.S. Thanks for pointing out the link was broken and providing a correct link in your response. I have fixed the link in the blog.

Comment by Ronnie Wright on December 9, 2010 at 12:19

Michael, I certainly don’t think Nuclear is the answer. I think that what we need is a list of things: a mix of renewable energy, increased energy efficiency, a complete scale back of our economy so that we live by our needs not our greed’s and of course a price on carbon.

However, I support a carbon fee and dividend as supported by the Climate Scientist James Hensen and not carbon trading like that which is promoted by the carbon trading corporation of which you are the CEO. Specifically it’s promotion of an Emissions Trading Scheme.

For the long list of reasons I prefer a carbon fee and dividend system over an ETS go here.

Cheers,

Ronnie Wright
World Change Cafe
PS. The link to your website in this blog post is broken. Your very interesting report can be found here for those that are interested.