Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on April 19, 2016
MIT Prof Says Carbon Tax Only Way to Stop Fossil Fuels
There may be no more efficient method of communication than price. The market always knows best. Prices instantly convey the collective wisdom of producers and consumers involved at every stage of production, signaling to each whether they should produce, or consume, more or less.
For years, opponents of fossil fuels have warned of “peak oil,” an anticipated point beyond which there will no longer be enough retrievable deposits to sustain our insatiable thirst. It has always been a flawed claim, first because it ignores the human capacity for innovation, and also because the artificial restrictions offered in response only exacerbate supply problems.
Of course, peak oil was never about making anything better. It was never about solving a supply problem. It was about opposing fossil fuels as such. News out of MIT confirms this motive, as one professor bemoans the development of new production techniques which have made fossil fuels cheaper. From MIT News:
… Technology-driven cost reductions in fossil fuels will lead us to continue using all the oil, gas, and coal we can, unless governments pass new taxes on carbon emissions.“If we don’t adopt new policies, we’re not going to be leaving fossil fuels in the ground,” says Christopher Knittel, an energy economist at the MIT Sloan School of Management. “We need both a policy like a carbon tax and to put more R&D money into renewables.”
While renewable energy has made promising gains in just the last few years — the cost of solar dropped by about two-thirds from 2009 to 2014 — new drilling and extraction techniques have made fossil fuels cheaper and markedly increased the amount of oil and gas we can tap into. In the U.S. alone, oil reserves have expanded 59 percent between 2000 and 2014, and natural gas reserves have expanded 94 percent in the same time.
“You often hear, when fossil fuel prices are going up, that if we just leave the market alone we’ll wean ourselves off fossil fuels,” adds Knittel. “But the message from the data is clear: That’s not going to happen any time soon.”
Cheaper fossil fuel production should be heralded as good news. Increased value at a lower cost is always good. It enables actors throughout the economy to get more done, to be more productive, and thus improve their quality of life. By advocating the artificial encumberment of carbon tax, Knittel argues for less productivity and a lower quality of life. That’s morally indefensible.
15 Comments on "MIT Prof Says Carbon Tax Only Way to Stop Fossil Fuels"
makati1 on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 9:30 pm
Carbon tax = a corporate money maker that will only exchange pollution locations for money. It will not “cut” any pollution.
Anonymous on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 9:36 pm
What a load of sheeeeit. From start to finish.
peakyeast on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 10:11 pm
OMFG. Walter Hudson – you are a friggin MORON.
I say: SuperDuperSize Walters gratis McD meal – and stuff it down his throat until his intestines burst. More is ALWAYS better – even when its killing you. ..
I actually agree – that is only in this one example.
Apneaman on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 10:37 pm
Actually, burning fossil carbon is what is going to stop future use. Extinct species don’t use fuel. There is an approximate 40 year lag from emissions to warming, so the ever growing amount of disasters/consequences we have been experiencing are from carbon burned up to the 1980’s. The joke is that half of all industrial emissions have come in the last 30 years. Climate change is non linear – that should be apparent to anyone half paying attention. Apes are going bye bye and there is nothing that can stop it – just physics, chemistry and biologly.
Go Speed Racer on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 11:28 pm
The carbon tax should only apply to those making less than $180K per year, forcing them to ride the bus. For those making more than $180K per year, they are granted carbon tax exemption so they can keep driving their 11 mpg Bentley V-12.
James Tipper on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 11:32 pm
The early 2000’s called, they want their shitty idea back.
makati1 on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 11:38 pm
Nice satire, Go. ^_^
GregT on Tue, 19th Apr 2016 11:48 pm
It was a lovely day up here in the Pacific Northwest, for July. The temperature was 13° C above normal averages for this time of the year. For those still hopelessly stuck at 17th century German physics, ( 🙂 ) that would be 23.1°F above normal average temperatures. More all time temperature records shattered.
Apneaman on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 12:06 am
Greg, when I was in Georgia a guy told me “they” did not adopt the metric system because it was invented by commies. Except for the US military and scientific community and some mechanics who need metric tool sets. Oh and pop comes in 2 litre bottles too. Yep, there is nothing more complicated in the entire universe than counting in units of ten.
My ex wife used to laugh her ass off at my frustration and bafflement.
John Kintree on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 7:31 am
First question is how much of a carbon tax? The apparent costs of burning fossil fuels keeps rising. The massive bleaching of coral reefs worldwide at 400 ppm of atmospheric CO2 is one indicator.
The next question is how would the carbon tax be applied?
rockman on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 12:22 pm
John – The only way a carbon tax cold have any real effect is if it drastically reduced consumption. Then the question remains: how much could the economies of the major fossil fuel consuming nations contract if the reduction of ff consumption is significant enough? IOW unless carbon taxes are phased in very slowly over many decades it will negatively impact those economies and do so in a manner unacceptable to the voting public IMHO.
Outcast_Searcher on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 1:21 pm
rockman, I agree with you. I have wanted to do this re an old fashioned gasoline tax, starting in 1980 during the third oil price surge in a decade.
Assuming a carbon tax would be on ALL fossil fuel burning, even a small tax added year after year would really add up.
One place I don’t necessarily agree with you is the term “many” decades. I don’t think we have that long. We really need to be making a big impact within, say, two decades IMHO. (Would a 5% escalating tax added each year, which would over double the prices in 20 years be enough? I would think so).
One problem I see is that if this isn’t done uniformly, it will disadvantage the economies that do it in the short term, by increasing energy expenses on their globally competitive businesses.
Do we offset income taxes to mitigate that? — because what I DON’T see is the world agreeing to have everybody do this in a fair and coordinated manner — not even close.
Boat on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:47 pm
“One problem I see is that if this isn’t done uniformly, it will disadvantage the economies that do it in the short term, by increasing energy expenses on their globally competitive businesses”.
If you spend the tax income on energy related projects like transmission lines, public transit, nat gas subsidies for semi truck engines, efficient government buildings etc. you can defray losses in trade.
John Kintree on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 5:22 pm
Right. A carbon tax that was high enough to seriously reduce fossil fuel use could cripple the economy. Damned if we do, and damned if we don’t.
The question remains, how would one even calculate the external costs of burning fossil fuels? Did previous attempts to do so include massive die offs of coral reefs which is happening now?
Kenz300 on Fri, 22nd Apr 2016 7:26 am
New Documents Show Oil Industry Even More Evil Than We Thought
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-cover-up-climate_us_570e98bbe4b0ffa5937df6ce
Climate Change is real….. we will all be impacted by it.
Oil Giants Spend $115 Million A Year To Oppose Climate Policy
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-companies-climate-policy_us_570bb841e4b0142232496d97
The Kochs Are Plotting A Multimillion-Dollar Assault On Electric Vehicles
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/koch-electric-vehicles_us_56c4d63ce4b0b40245c8cbf6
Inside the Koch Brothers’ Toxic Empire | Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-koch-brothers-toxic-empire-20140924?page=2