Ask Congress and President Biden for a price on carbon!


Larry
 

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/


Robert Virkus
 

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/


Dharma Dharmarajan
 

Way to go Larry. Keep after your mission, but with renewables in the rearview mirror. Naysayers and let the "market forces drive technology development" preachers are typical do-nothing folks, who are no different from anti-vaxxers - anything the Government does for the good of humanity is wrong. Go figure. Dharma.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:28 AM 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/


Mark Witte
 

I agree, Dharma.

It's hard to envision the "markets" deciding that fossil fuel industries should pay for their negative externalities. 

Besides, governments decided to pick the winners long ago. Governments the world over have provided generous subsidies to the fossil fuel industry for decades. Maybe it's time the playing field was level. 

Mark H. Witte 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 12:55:30 PM CDT, Dharma Dharmarajan <dharma.tx@...> wrote:


Way to go Larry. Keep after your mission, but with renewables in the rearview mirror. Naysayers and let the "market forces drive technology development" preachers are typical do-nothing folks, who are no different from anti-vaxxers - anything the Government does for the good of humanity is wrong. Go figure. Dharma.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:28 AM 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/


R. Michael Martin
 

When you “pick a winner” that is truly valuable and good across a very broad spectrum of a society (eg how clean energy is pretty much good for everyone everywhere in the USA) it is responsible leadership…new solutions historically have received govt support to improve/expand due to value to its citizens.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 13:03, Mark Witte via groups.io <witte.m@...> wrote:

I agree, Dharma.

It's hard to envision the "markets" deciding that fossil fuel industries should pay for their negative externalities. 

Besides, governments decided to pick the winners long ago. Governments the world over have provided generous subsidies to the fossil fuel industry for decades. Maybe it's time the playing field was level. 

Mark H. Witte 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 12:55:30 PM CDT, Dharma Dharmarajan <dharma.tx@...> wrote:


Way to go Larry. Keep after your mission, but with renewables in the rearview mirror. Naysayers and let the "market forces drive technology development" preachers are typical do-nothing folks, who are no different from anti-vaxxers - anything the Government does for the good of humanity is wrong. Go figure. Dharma.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:28 AM 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!





Mellen West
 

Robert V.  History proves that market (profit) decisions are generally bad for the environment and government must step in to protect the general population from selfish activity of a few socially irresponsible entities.  Pleas cite one example of how market forces have benefitted the the environment.


Mellen West
 

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/


Philip Timmons
 

Would be more impressed if Biden would take off Trump's Anti-Solar Punitive Tariff.  

Speaking of "level playing field" and all.  

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 11:28:14 AM CDT, Larry via groups.io <rlhowejr@...> 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/


Larry
 

Here's a quick explainer video on how it works - https://vimeo.com/589063126

Also, check out this statement from 3500+ economists - https://clcouncil.org/economists-statement/


Dharma Dharmarajan
 

Mike - not universally true!! “All clean energy projects are not treated equitably”!! How can I forget the power of lobbyists for the wrong causes! Just a year or two back, a 7 plus “BILLION DOLLAR” boondoggle of a Clean Coal CO2 capture and sequestration project by Southern Company, funded by “our hard earned” dollars was scrapped.  The plant was constructed (over budget and delayed several years) and ready to go, when it was fully recognized from the word get go, that those approaches of CO2 capture from stack gases and sequestration would make no economic sense. 

Southern Company knew that, and being a regulated utility, reckoned that it could recover some of its investments by rate basing, to help grow their revenues. SoCo, the Coal Company, vendors of equipment, etc lobbied the heck out of their Senators and Congressional Reps in DC and forced DOE’ hand into funding that endeavor, while attacking funding for Solandra, which went bankrupt because of competitive pressures, not technological reasons. The fossil fuel industry needs no reprieve of any sorts in my estimation! Dharma.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 1:54 PM R. Michael Martin <mm@...> wrote:
When you “pick a winner” that is truly valuable and good across a very broad spectrum of a society (eg how clean energy is pretty much good for everyone everywhere in the USA) it is responsible leadership…new solutions historically have received govt support to improve/expand due to value to its citizens.


On Oct 13, 2021, at 13:03, Mark Witte via groups.io <witte.m@...> wrote:

I agree, Dharma.

It's hard to envision the "markets" deciding that fossil fuel industries should pay for their negative externalities. 

Besides, governments decided to pick the winners long ago. Governments the world over have provided generous subsidies to the fossil fuel industry for decades. Maybe it's time the playing field was level. 

Mark H. Witte 

On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 12:55:30 PM CDT, Dharma Dharmarajan <dharma.tx@...> wrote:


Way to go Larry. Keep after your mission, but with renewables in the rearview mirror. Naysayers and let the "market forces drive technology development" preachers are typical do-nothing folks, who are no different from anti-vaxxers - anything the Government does for the good of humanity is wrong. Go figure. Dharma.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:28 AM 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!





Larry
 

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.


Mellen West
 

Robert V. Thanks for keeping the conversation lively. I see little point in preaching to the saved.
M


Joachim Saupe
 

Right on, Dharma!

Joachim

“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little”
Franklin D. Roosevelt



On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 12:55:28 PM CDT, Dharma Dharmarajan <dharma.tx@...> wrote:


Way to go Larry. Keep after your mission, but with renewables in the rearview mirror. Naysayers and let the "market forces drive technology development" preachers are typical do-nothing folks, who are no different from anti-vaxxers - anything the Government does for the good of humanity is wrong. Go figure. Dharma.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:28 AM 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/


R. Michael Martin
 

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>


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/


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>


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>


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>


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>







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>