U.S. groups suggest putting price on carbon
May 27, 2011, Washington, D.C. – The U.S. government's fiscal outlook could be improved by adopting a federal carbon price, according to plans submitted by four Washington, D.C., think tanks.
May 27, 2011 By Argus Media
May 27, 2011, Washington, D.C. – The U.S.
government's fiscal outlook could be improved by adopting a federal carbon
price, according to plans submitted by four Washington, D.C., think tanks. The
Peterson Foundation, a group concerned with the U.S. debt and deficit problems,
commissioned and released a variety of proposals for addressing fiscal
challenges at a conference in Washington, D.C., in late May 2011. Each proposal
varies in details, but four suggested or considered implementing a nationwide
carbon tax or cap-and-trade program to increase federal revenues.
The American Enterprise Institute called
for ending energy subsidies and greenhouse gas regulations in favour of a
$26/tonne carbon tax to be phased in between 2013 and 2017 and then increased
5.6%/year through 2050.
The Roosevelt Institute Campus Network's
plan, which called for a $23/tonne tax on carbon beginning in 2012 that
increases by 5.6%/year, suggested a tax would be more efficient than a
cap-and-trade system because it confers more certainty about the future price
The Center for American Progress proposal
included a $5/barrel tariff on oil imports while pricing carbon in an unspecified
manner. The Center said both policies would raise the equivalent of 0.6% of
U.S. GDP in 2017, rising to 0.8% by 2027 and remaining stable at that level
through 2035, the final year considered in the plan.
The Economic Policy Institute called for a
carbon tax or cap-and-trade program, with auction revenues dedicated to deficit
Two other groups shied away from setting a
carbon price. The Bipartisan Policy Center did not formally recommend a carbon
tax, but said that “a tax of $23/tonne of CO2 emissions in 2018, increasing at
5.8% annually” would result in a 10% cut in carbon emissions by 2025, while
raising $1.1 trillion for deficit reduction. The Center could not reach
consensus on whether to include a carbon price in its recommendations. The only
plan that included no mention of climate change, let alone setting a price for
carbon, was submitted by the conservative Heritage Foundation.
Please visit ArgusMedia.com for more information.
Copyright © 2012 Argus Media Ltd. All rights reserved. By reading
this article, you agree that you will not copy or reproduce any part of
its contents (including, but not limited to single prices or any other
individual items of data) in any form or for any purpose whatsoever
without prior consent of the publisher.
Print this page