- Obama takes aim at ‘corporate deserters’
- Dick’s Sporting Goods lays off 478 PGA golf pros
- Senators: Cease-fire must allow Israel to defend against rockets, tunnels
- Sierra Leone doctor fighting Ebola catches disease
- Iraq welcomes Russian fighter jets, helicopter gunships into ISIL fight
- John McCain laments: Obama’s ‘self-pity … is really kind of sad’
- GOP offer to fix VA gives $10 billion in emergency funds
- Paul Ryan offers to repair U.S. economic safety net with a single grant stream
- Kim Jong-un builds bond with Putin: $250M Russia-backed addition to key port opens
- Pope Francis meets Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman sentenced to death
Carbon programs’ backlash in Australia, EU bode ill for U.S. efforts to fight climate change
Question of the Day
Recent stumbles in Europe and Australia to implement ambitious climate change programs are providing a “cautionary tale” for the Obama administration and U.S. lawmakers as they consider how to fulfill President Obama’s drive to reduce U.S. greenhouse gases.
A popular backlash against a carbon tax in Australia and major implementation problems with the European Union’s “cap-and-trade” carbon emissions trading program are raising fresh doubts about the two main policy vehicles that climate change advocates have backed to curb greenhouse gas pollution in the industrial world, analysts say.
Australia’s new prime minister, Kevin Rudd, vowed this week to kill the country’s hugely unpopular carbon tax, a move that is expected to save companies billions of dollars and translate into lower energy bills for the average household.
In his first major policy change since regaining control of the ruling Labor Party last month, Mr. Rudd announced that Australia would junk the direct tax on polluters and transition to the same cap-and-trade system that Europe uses to reduce emissions by next summer, which will lessen the impact on the economy.
But the European Union’s cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme, while more affordable than the carbon tax, has run into problems of its own, as the early “market” for polluting rights proved badly out of whack, sending designers back to the drawing board. Also, it may prove less effective at reducing emissions, critics say, and, ultimately, curbing climate change.
Around the world, politicians are finding it difficult to strike a balance between energy policies that effectively reduce emissions while not costing too much and irritating voters.
“Certainly, nothing about the failure of the European Union’s emissions trading scheme or the extremely unpopular Australian carbon tax is likely to encourage American politicians to want to go through the same experience here,” said Lee Lane, climate and energy policy specialist at the Hudson Institute.
Jeff Kueter, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, said such aggressive climate change agendas are proving to be “political suicide.”
“The Australian example is a cautionary tale for any policymaker in the U.S. who is thinking about a carbon tax,” he warned.
But environmentalists and some economists say the Rudd government’s plan to move forward with an EU-style emissions trading scheme does not indicate that the carbon tax was a failure or that the country is giving up on reducing its greenhouse gas output.
Canberra is merely speeding up a plan that was in place to move toward a cap-and-trade system, said Nathaniel Keohane, vice president at the Environmental Defense Fund.
“They’re talking about whether they should use one type of climate policy or another, but I think the important thing is that the Rudd administration is continuing to have a climate policy in place,” Mr. Keohane said.
In fact, Mr. Keohane suggested the cap-and-trade system — in which industries and factories can buy and sell credits to pollute — may be even more effective at reducing emissions, because it sets a roof on how much carbon an entire industry can pollute, where a carbon tax allows for as much emissions as industry can afford.
“The thing about cap-and-trade is, you set the cap and you’re going to meet it,” he said. “There’s a strong advantage with cap-and-trade systems because they guarantee a reduction in emissions.”
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Tim Devaney is a national reporter who covers business and international trade for The Washington Times. Previously, he worked for the Detroit News, Grand Rapids Press, Portland Press Herald and Bangor Daily News. Tim can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
- Dysfunction, disarray at Homeland Security management cited in IG's report
- GM's Barra to be first woman to run top American carmaker
- Treasury sells last shares in 'Government Motors'
- U.S. businesses reach out quickly to partners in Iran
- General Motors ending Chevrolet sales in Europe to focus on Opel and Vauxhall
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
Second- and third-stringers eye ’16 if front-runner stumbles
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- Hamas rejects Kerry's call for cease-fire; Fears grow others could join fight against Israel
- Evidence shows Russia firing artillery into Ukraine: Pentagon
- Obama's empty tough-talk: Gun prosecutions plummet on his watch
- Conservative groups decry Democrats' 'war on women' tactic
- Algerian plane diverted due to storms, second aircraft: 116 missing
- Cutler wins endorsement from gun control group
- Obama says public not familiar enough with issues
- Obama orders Pentagon advisers to Ukraine
- CARSON: Costco and the perils of mixing politics and business
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq