[SustainableTompkins] Ithaca's Environment Committee: resolution to support a federal carbon tax

[Sylvester Johnson]

Dear Friends,
For those who might speak tonight during public comment in favor of the passage of  a resolution to support a federal carbon tax, I've prepared the following talking points.  Meeting's at 7PM on Monday Dec. 17th (meeting on the 2nd Fl because someone else has Council Chambers.)
	The debate between a federal carbon tax and emissions trading may seem remote from daily life in Ithaca, but the outcome will affect residents for decades. NYC is also remote from Washington, however Mayor Michael Bloomberg has declared his support for a federal carbon tax. 
It?s said that a federal carbon tax is politically impossible, but if the substantial advantages of a tax over trading in emissions of carbon dioxide both for the economy and the environment were more widely known, a tax would become a political possibility. 
For example, usage of the tax proceeds to fund income tax rebates would motivate reductions in usage of fossil fuels while stimulating the economy and making it more efficient.
Although emissions trading is being pushed as an alternative to a tax, the cost of trading spreads throughout the economy like a tax. However, due to its complexity, trading costs society substantially more than an actual tax. 
In addition, the volatility of trading makes returns on investments more uncertain. This volatility will likely prove a deterrent to investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. 
Offsets associated with trading create disconcerting challenges for fair quantification and for reliable verification, with many offsets also actually building-in warming. 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. 
The European experiment in cap-trade has been called a failure. Effective action requires reducing emissions at the source, not trading off the pressure to reduce emissions. 
A federal carbon tax is projected by many economists 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. 
A tax achieves annual goals for reduction of emissions by applying judiciously adjusted price-demand modeling. Using this well-developed modeling, the fixed tax rate for each year gets determined by the goal for each year?s reduction in usage of fossil fuels.
The major part of the proceeds of a tax could fund an income tax rebate. The rest of the tax proceeds could fund projects such as energy conservation and the production of energy from renewable sources.
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. A carbon tax could be implemented more readily in a worldwide protocol.
A new tax is said to be politically impossible, but that?s only until both labor and business learn of the above reasons for each to support a tax over emissions trading. These advantages mean a federal carbon tax could soon become a political possibility.
With local entities? support for enactment of a federal carbon tax fueling further discussion and sending signals of support to Washington, a federal carbon tax could soon become the general preference over cap-trade.
- From Sylvester Johnson, Ph.D. Applied Physics, of the Climate Change Action Group of Central New York. The above summary is from his article at http://climatehealth.net/ArticleCarbonTax.html.

Happy Holiday!
Best regards,
Sylvester
Sylvester Johnson
ContactSJ at mac.com
Non-profit website: www.climatehealth.net
P.O. Box 146
Brooktondale NY USA 14817-0146