We had a very well-attended online meeting on Tuesday 23rd May 2019 and lots of things were shared and discussed.
Next online meeting Tuesday May 21st 2019, 8pm, via Zoom – click this link just before the meeting begins – https://zoom.us/j/343351338
Topic: starting or reinvigorating a local group
(Anything you want to add to these notes, email Louisa.)
Action for the coming month: give a talk, write to/meet your MP, or local newspaper/social media to spread awareness of Carbon Fee and Dividend as a solution to climate change. Still not enough people know about it – awareness is top priority. Extinction Rebellion and the school climate strikes have created amazing awareness and energy around climate change – we are here to help by offering a fast, effective and kind solution.
We went through CCL’s five levers of political will.
Link to the CCL UK conference presentations in May on CCL UK Google Drive folder, including:
- Mini’s flyers
- a desk top printable version of a simple double-sided A5 flyer, particularly suitable for handing out to Extinction Rebellion protesters/Student Strikers
- template editable grassroots presentation
Anyone who wants a stack of Mini Grey’s lovely colour flyers explaining CF&D to hand out – email us.
CCL UK YouTube channel, including a two minute video explaining CF&D: www.youtube.com/channel/UCKg3OsMPlMzXlE0sGxrwhkg
If you want to blog on this website – as long as it follows our CCL values, yes please – please ask Louisa or Paul. Professor Dave Waltham is now a columnist for a local online newspaper regarding giving Wiltshire Council assistance to lower their emissions – he is sharing these columns on our website.
Zeeshan Hasan’s presentation he gave to the Southgate/Enfield Labour Party: https://www.slideshare.net/ZeeshanHasan10/how-to-save-the-planet-and-make-society-more-equal-140524923
The LibDems are very onboard with CF&D – they will be debating whether to adopt it at the 2019 party conference. Fated to be the next LibDem leader, Layla Moran MP mentioned CF&D at the Feb climate change parliamentary debate.
How to find out about your MP: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/
What about the latest stuff on the government’s actions on emissions targets to meet the Paris agreement?
- From Dave W: “UK government figures are currently 7 tonnes CO2 per person per year. Mike Berners-Lee includes consumption emissions and makes it 13 tonnes each.”
- From Simon F: “That 13 tonnes figure tallies. I worked out a footprint for me + wife and it came in a little under that 7 tonnes. Then I included what I’d purchased and it doubled!!”
- From Michael R: “The Carbon Price Floor was introduced in 2013 at a rate of £16 (€18.05) per tonne of carbon dioxide-equivalent (tCO2e), and was set to increase to £30 (€33.85) by 2020. However, the government more recently decided to cap the Carbon Price Floor at £18.08 (€20.40) till 2021.”
- From Zeeshan: “However, the UK still subsidizes fossil fuels by about 10 billion pounds per year if one counts lower VAT on fuel: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/23/uk-has-biggest-fossil-fuel-subsidies-in-the-eu-finds-commission
- Get updates from the Environmental Audit Committee: https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environmental-audit-committee/
- Via Climate Emergency UK (and shared on CCL UK’s FB page): “The Government confirmed this week that it will miss its carbon targets by a widening margin. A new official report released on Wednesday by the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) updates energy and emissions projections for the next three Carbon Budget periods, which run through to 2032. The update confirms that while the UK is on track to comply with the current Third Carbon Budget, which runs from 2018 to 2022, it is expected to miss the Fourth and Fifth Carbon Budgets by a wider margin than previously expected, based on current policies.”
- Response to climate change protests and UK’s reponse by Claire Perry, Minister for Clean Energy and Growth
- Watch the parliamentary debate from Tuesday
Michael R. made the case that Carbon Fee and Dividend would price fossil fuels out of the market, and make them a toxic investment. Imagine an oil company going to investors, he said, and asking for whatever millions of investment they needed for their latest exploration and being shown the door.
Dave W’s comment: “There will also be a race by oil companies to sell their oil fast. It can have temporary bad effects.”
How does Canada’s carbon fee and dividend compare with the model we are promoting? Or, more rightly, the US’s Energy and Innovation Carbon Dividend Act? Here’s a video.
Wolfram would like to start a CCL group in Exeter – any CCLers down that way? If so, email us.
“The case for carbon tax” by Shi-Ling Hsu
Summary by Zeeshan:
Pages 27-28 explaining ‘economically optimal’ Pigouvian carbon tax:
“A common economic prescription for reducing pollution is the imposition of a “Pigouvian” tax, named for the economist Alfred Pigou. A Pigouvian tax is a unitary tax levied to make an emitter pay for the externalities caused by its emissions – no more, no less. A carbon tax could be a Pigouvian tax. In theory, a Pigouvian carbon tax would be set at a level equal to the damages of the emissions of a ton of carbon or carbon dioxide.
The problem with the Pigouvian taxation of carbon dioxide is that there is a great deal of controversy over estimates of the marginal damages of carbon dioxide emissions… A 2005 survey of marginal damages studies by Richard Tol found a range of estimates from zero to more than one thousand dollars per ton. More recently, a study by William Nordhaus estimated the marginal society damages at about $7.50 t/CO2. A much higher estimate was obtained in the UK government-commissioned Stern Review, by Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist of the World Bank, which estimated current marginal damages at about $85/tCO2.”
Carbon dividends to make tax progressive and reduce impact on poor:
“…revenues raised by carbon taxes may need to be refunded to help build political support. Because Pigouvian taxes have been so unpopular in the past and carbon taxes remain unpopular, recent carbon tax programs have been put forth as being ‘revenue neutral’… Concerns over the regressiveness of carbon taxes may force a substantial redistribution of carbon tax revenues”
“A… class of objections to carbon taxes has to do with its perceived regressiveness. A carbon tax is considered a form of a consumption tax, and without some adjustments or exemptions, consumption taxes tend to disproportionately hurt poorer individuals and households.”
“The key to addressing the regressiveness problem of carbon taxes is to return, or ‘recycle’, at least a large portion of the carbon tax revenues… back to taxpayers in a way that blunts or even reverses the economic pain suffered by poor households.”
Using international trade to decarbonise globally with carbon taxes and border adjustments:
“A carbon tax, if it could be scaled up to an international accord, represents a better chance of engaging China, India and developing countries and providing their governments with the incentives to put in place and keep in place policies to reduce emissions.”
“If a country regulated greenhouse gas emissions and could, via border tax adjustments, equalize the international playing field, then greenhouse gas regulation would not necessarily put domestic industries at a competitive disadvantage. A border tax adjustment could take many forms, but most commonly would be the levy of an import tax on products imported from countries that did not regulate greenhouse gas emissions. So products made in countries which do not regulate greenhouse gas emissions would face a tax when they seek to export to countries that have domestic greenhouse gas regulations”