Date   

Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Larry
 

Robert - FYI - It is conservatives with experience that are promoting carbon fee and dividend with border adjustment - James Baker and George Schultz - see https://clcouncil.org/

Likewise - as a conservative myself, it took me a while to come to understand and agree with this approach, but what sticks with me the most is that we can't knowingly keep dumping our trash for free. Here's my essay on my climate journey. Give it a read and let me know what you think - https://medium.com/@rlhowejr/the-path-to-climate-solutions-for-this-lifelong-republican-voter-and-native-texan-part-1-of-3-771a9dc8a588


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

R. Michael Martin
 

their history is factually known to deny and delay…that is bad for most of us and expresses their position on the clean energy pie.

we each face the stick of costs to live together…eg pay out city to take away our waste.  The carrot is use less and create less/zero waste.


On Oct 14, 2021, at 11:35, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0@...> wrote:

Meant ... Have a piece of the pie too if they choose..

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Robert Virkus <contrarian0@...> wrote:
I just prefer rewarding companies if they go green as opposed to punishing them if they don't. The market will take care of the dinosaurs. There is no reason the companies producing polluting energy sources cannot transition to greener sources and have a piece of the pie took they choose. If managed well the transition doesn't have to be painful. I prefer the carrot but folks here seem to prefer the stick. 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Stan Aten <s.aten@...> wrote:
A properly carbon tax would reduce the use of carbon and encourage individuals and businesses to change their source of energy.   It is cheaper than government subsidies and mandates because it allows the market to decide which is the best method for reducing carbon emissions.

If carbon taxes are high enough, then oil and gas companies won't flare so much oil and gas into the environment.    It will raise prices but part of the tax could be rebated to consumers and part could be used to help individuals and businesses reduce their carbon emissions.

It would encourage the replacement of fuel guzzling vehicles with newer vehicles that get better gas mileage or use electricity.

This concept was used to reduce the production of fluorocarbons quite successfully.




On Thursday, October 14, 2021, 10:58:32 AM CDT, Robert Virkus <contrarian0@...> wrote:


Are you in favor of massively increasing the price of gasoline at the pump? Or bleeding oil companies dry so they make no profit?
Would you like the gasoline supply to dry up overnight? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>












Re: Biden Administration Plans Wind Farms Along Nearly the Entire U.S. Coastline

thewineprince
 

What we needed was a Bernie presidency and a matching likeminded supermajority in the House and Senate. And the majority of states.

Any less meant movement would be predicably slow with little if any real headway. 

But Bernie again got railroaded out and the public was deceived, frightened again with the prospect of too much change too fast so here we are. 

It’s just disgusting what greed and power does even when running headlong into disaster.

Just my two cents. 

Sent from ProtonMail for iOS


On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 4:24 PM, Bill Byrom via groups.io <bill@...> wrote:
I think that those without New York Times subscriptions can read this article, but I can’t tell:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/13/climate/biden-offshore-wind-farms.html?referringSource=articleShare 

Interior Secretary Deb Haaland announced that her agency will formally begin the process of identifying federal waters to lease to wind developers by 2025.



Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

thewineprince
 

Our government did bankroll ARPANET, which then be ame the Internet you are using to read this post. 

Our government did bankroll the New Deal tgat gave us so much of what we enjoy today. 

Business entities are not large enough or durable enough, too profit driven and have the escape hatch of bankruptcy, to do many of the things that must be done on a national scale, and quickly. 

Though industries will pick up some of it, business alone is only one small piece of the resources needed to tackle climate and the establishment of renewables as the dominant force in the country and the world.

What we really need is multiple government driven civil services aimed squarely at achieving these goals.

Sent from ProtonMail for iOS


On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 11:10 AM, Robert Virkus <Contrarian0@...> wrote:
The point is no matter what rules the government creates, they do not make the investments and take the risks that businesses do. The government did not create the RE industry. You should thank the investors in green energy companies. Lots of them lose money taking risks. It is no big risk for the government to make rules allowing things. 



On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Fred Anders <fjanders1@...> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 06:32 AM, Robert Virkus wrote:
Every green technology available is available because investors and business people made financial decisions based on markets and profits. 
Robert- Are you just trolling this forum, or are you not familiar with the extent to which the Federal ITC/PTC credits, state RPS's, and other government policies defined the market rules that have driven most RE growth?




Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

Meant ... Have a piece of the pie too if they choose..


On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Robert Virkus <contrarian0@...> wrote:
I just prefer rewarding companies if they go green as opposed to punishing them if they don't. The market will take care of the dinosaurs. There is no reason the companies producing polluting energy sources cannot transition to greener sources and have a piece of the pie took they choose. If managed well the transition doesn't have to be painful. I prefer the carrot but folks here seem to prefer the stick. 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Stan Aten <s.aten@...> wrote:
A properly carbon tax would reduce the use of carbon and encourage individuals and businesses to change their source of energy.   It is cheaper than government subsidies and mandates because it allows the market to decide which is the best method for reducing carbon emissions.

If carbon taxes are high enough, then oil and gas companies won't flare so much oil and gas into the environment.    It will raise prices but part of the tax could be rebated to consumers and part could be used to help individuals and businesses reduce their carbon emissions.

It would encourage the replacement of fuel guzzling vehicles with newer vehicles that get better gas mileage or use electricity.

This concept was used to reduce the production of fluorocarbons quite successfully.




On Thursday, October 14, 2021, 10:58:32 AM CDT, Robert Virkus <contrarian0@...> wrote:


Are you in favor of massively increasing the price of gasoline at the pump? Or bleeding oil companies dry so they make no profit?
Would you like the gasoline supply to dry up overnight? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>







Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

I just prefer rewarding companies if they go green as opposed to punishing them if they don't. The market will take care of the dinosaurs. There is no reason the companies producing polluting energy sources cannot transition to greener sources and have a piece of the pie took they choose. If managed well the transition doesn't have to be painful. I prefer the carrot but folks here seem to prefer the stick. 


On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Stan Aten <s.aten@...> wrote:
A properly carbon tax would reduce the use of carbon and encourage individuals and businesses to change their source of energy.   It is cheaper than government subsidies and mandates because it allows the market to decide which is the best method for reducing carbon emissions.

If carbon taxes are high enough, then oil and gas companies won't flare so much oil and gas into the environment.    It will raise prices but part of the tax could be rebated to consumers and part could be used to help individuals and businesses reduce their carbon emissions.

It would encourage the replacement of fuel guzzling vehicles with newer vehicles that get better gas mileage or use electricity.

This concept was used to reduce the production of fluorocarbons quite successfully.




On Thursday, October 14, 2021, 10:58:32 AM CDT, Robert Virkus <contrarian0@...> wrote:


Are you in favor of massively increasing the price of gasoline at the pump? Or bleeding oil companies dry so they make no profit?
Would you like the gasoline supply to dry up overnight? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>







Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

The point is no matter what rules the government creates, they do not make the investments and take the risks that businesses do. The government did not create the RE industry. You should thank the investors in green energy companies. Lots of them lose money taking risks. It is no big risk for the government to make rules allowing things. 



On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Fred Anders <fjanders1@...> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 06:32 AM, Robert Virkus wrote:
Every green technology available is available because investors and business people made financial decisions based on markets and profits. 
Robert- Are you just trolling this forum, or are you not familiar with the extent to which the Federal ITC/PTC credits, state RPS's, and other government policies defined the market rules that have driven most RE growth?


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

R. Michael Martin
 

I am in favor of a healthy and just community and planet and the current arrangements have created exactly the opposite (that is fact).

I find your statements are fear-laden and unrealistic (not facts rather classic fossil fuel industry talking points) as nothing will happen overnight but everything must change over time, faster = better toward my first point above.

Everyone have a good weekend, enjoy the cooler temps that have arrived!


On Oct 14, 2021, at 10:57, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0@...> wrote:

Are you in favor of massively increasing the price of gasoline at the pump? Or bleeding oil companies dry so they make no profit?
Would you like the gasoline supply to dry up overnight? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>










Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Stan Aten
 

A properly carbon tax would reduce the use of carbon and encourage individuals and businesses to change their source of energy.   It is cheaper than government subsidies and mandates because it allows the market to decide which is the best method for reducing carbon emissions.

If carbon taxes are high enough, then oil and gas companies won't flare so much oil and gas into the environment.    It will raise prices but part of the tax could be rebated to consumers and part could be used to help individuals and businesses reduce their carbon emissions.

It would encourage the replacement of fuel guzzling vehicles with newer vehicles that get better gas mileage or use electricity.

This concept was used to reduce the production of fluorocarbons quite successfully.




On Thursday, October 14, 2021, 10:58:32 AM CDT, Robert Virkus <contrarian0@...> wrote:


Are you in favor of massively increasing the price of gasoline at the pump? Or bleeding oil companies dry so they make no profit?
Would you like the gasoline supply to dry up overnight? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups. io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>







Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

I've been coming to the NTREG meetings for years so no, I'm no troll. I have an interest in green and alternative energy technology but I take a more conservative approach to energy policy, that's all. I think NTREG can handle a conservative member without an existential crisis.


On Thursday, October 14, 2021, Fred Anders <fjanders1@...> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 06:32 AM, Robert Virkus wrote:
Every green technology available is available because investors and business people made financial decisions based on markets and profits. 
Robert- Are you just trolling this forum, or are you not familiar with the extent to which the Federal ITC/PTC credits, state RPS's, and other government policies defined the market rules that have driven most RE growth?


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

Are you in favor of massively increasing the price of gasoline at the pump? Or bleeding oil companies dry so they make no profit?
Would you like the gasoline supply to dry up overnight? 


On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>







Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Dharma Dharmarajan
 

Spot on Michael! The O&G and affiliated industries have over extended themselves at any and all costs and have had one too many days in the sun (pun INTENDED). Time for them to go under the clouds and back off on their predatory practices. It is not that their demise is the wish of the people, just that their legacy system needs to own up to its responsibilities. It is very obvious that “Laissez faire” practices have to be date stamped in this day and age, much to the chagrin of several who swear by exceptionalism principles. Have a great day. Dharma.

On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 9:00 AM R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Fred Anders
 

On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 06:32 AM, Robert Virkus wrote:
Every green technology available is available because investors and business people made financial decisions based on markets and profits. 
Robert- Are you just trolling this forum, or are you not familiar with the extent to which the Federal ITC/PTC credits, state RPS's, and other government policies defined the market rules that have driven most RE growth?


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

thewineprince
 

Just the opposite. If you don’t punish businesses you’re telling business its ok to go ahead and pollute because you they will be forgiven if we catch you later on down the line. 

That’s like giving a misbehaving child a pass

Sent from ProtonMail for iOS


On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 8:36 AM, Robert Virkus <Contrarian0@...> wrote:
An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>




Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

R. Michael Martin
 

It is pretty simple as all communities in the developed world today do this for decades.

For this business waste problem, how about we start with pollution that is scientifically proven to cause massive human health problems and death?

Time to add it to the economics as that free ride (subsidy) that you and I and everyone pays needs to end today.



On Oct 14, 2021, at 09:24, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0@...> wrote:

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 

On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>







Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

So who gets to decide exactly what is this waste and how much it costs since that is not already in the economics now? 


On Thursday, October 14, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>


Re: Biden Administration Plans Wind Farms Along Nearly the Entire U.S. Coastline

Robert Virkus
 

Notice that these wind farms will Be built by the investments of corporations. All the Biden administration is going to do us allow them to be built if companies choose to make the investments. And they should do all the proper due diligence necessary rather than give the industry a quick special pass. 


On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, Mark Witte <witte.m@...> wrote:
The attached graphic provides an indication of the size and production difference between on-shore and off-shore wind turbines.  To make this administration's goal about renewable electricity generation a reality, they really need to move expeditiously. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 04:58:52 PM CDT, Bill Byrom via groups.io <bill=byrom.net@groups.io> wrote:


Large projects in such areas take years of planning. I believe that they intend to release for lease all of the many currently proposed offshore development areas by 2025, and as Luke points out many may be available much sooner. Of course, a lot of federal renewable energy projects didn’t move rapidly during the previous administration. Here is some related news:

Heather Zichal, a former climate adviser to President Barack Obama who now leads the American Clean Power Association, a renewable energy group, said Biden’s goal for offshore wind was “ambitious but achievable″ and an essential part of the goal to reach 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035.
In a related announcement, the Energy Department said it is spending $11.5 million to study risks that offshore wind development may pose to birds, bats, and marine mammals, and survey changes in commercial fish and marine invertebrate populations at an offshore wind site on the East Coast.
The department will spend $2 million on visual surveys and acoustic monitoring of marine mammals and seabirds at potential wind sites on the West Coast.
“In order for Americans living in coastal areas to see the benefits of offshore wind, we must ensure that it’s done with care for the surrounding ecosystem by coexisting with fisheries and marine life – and that’s exactly what this investment will do,” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in a news release.


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

R. Michael Martin
 

This is not taxation nor a penalty. It is paying for your waste like all citizens do.  

And in this case their higher cost if they are wasteful businesses will lead people to make other choices so that is absolutely ideal for the competitive free market. 


On Oct 14, 2021, at 08:36, Robert Virkus via groups.io <Contrarian0@...> wrote:

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

An extra tax on businesses is just a higher price for consumers and causes inflation for everyone. You cannot punish businesses for supplying what civilization needed over the last century. 


On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
We each and all pay for waste in our everyday lives…and businesses must as well after getting a lot of passes on that for most of the industrial age.  Price on carbon is just a price for your waste/trash…want to pay less, produce less.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 14:32, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> wrote:

For those who want to do a deeper dive, please read this attached 40 page essay by Tariq Fancy, August 2021. (Note: the yellow highlighting in the pdf file is mine.)

 

Here are a few relevant excerpts:

 

“Economics points to one inconvenient truth about climate change policy. And that is that in order to be effective, the policies have to raise the price of carbon, or CO2, and in doing that correct the externality of the marketplace,” Nordhaus said in a lecture at Stockholm University, two days before the Nobel ceremony.

 

“We have to get billions of people, now and in the future. Millions of firms. Thousands of governments… to take steps to move in the direction we want. And the only way you’re going to do that effectively is to

increase the price of carbon.” The idea behind a carbon tax is simple: if you make the entity creating the negative externality pay the costs of it (say, through a pollution tax), their incentives change and thus their behavior changes — and our existing system of business, markets, and competition starts to innovate toward greener alternatives. It’s kind of like making a basketball player pay fines whenever they cause harm to fans; if those costs are high enough, players will think twice before playing recklessly and instead find new ways to win cleanly.

 

While a carbon tax is not perfect, and must come accompanied by a broader set of sweeping policy measures, Nordhaus’ central point is worth noting: if you want to change the behavior of all of the players in the game, you have to change the rules of the game for everyone.

<2021-08 Tariq Fancy essay.pdf>


Re: Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

Robert Virkus
 

Mellen,

Every green technology available is available because investors and business people made financial decisions based on markets and profits. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, Mellen West <mellenmail@...> wrote:

Robert, If markets (profits) continue to make decisions, the planet is doomed.

Mellen

 

From: main@NTREG.groups.io <main@NTREG.groups.io> On Behalf Of Robert Virkus
Sent: Wednesday, 13 October, 2021 11:59 AM
To: main@ntreg.groups.io
Subject: Re: [NTREG] Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!

 

This is a bad idea, a very very very bad idea. Let the markets decide not the government. 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Let’s level the playing field by including the negative externalities in the price of burning fossil fuels.

We've generated over 130,000 contacts to Congress and the White House about including a #PriceOnCarbon in the reconciliation bill.

The pivotal moment has arrived for enacting this essential climate tool. Let your voice be heard!

https://citizensclimatelobby.org/get-loud-take-action/

121 - 140 of 3209