Carbon Circus

I was tidying up, throwing out old files, when I re-discovered this from last July, which I thought was at least interesting, and possibly still germane: an article by Jerry West, publisher of the Gold River Record, and my response.


B.C.'s carbon circus continues
by Jerry West
July 9, 2008

British Columbia's carbon circus continues. On July 5 Premier Gordon Campbell published an editorial in the Vancouver Sun titled "Climate change is our problem to solve." It would be nice if the premier was serious about actually doing something effective to address the climate change problem. It would be even nicer if he admitted the truth that our climate change issue is only a symptom of a much bigger problem. But don't hold your breath, his political backers would be rid of him in a minute if he got serious about climate change, and they would go wild if he even mentioned the core problem.

We have a climate change problem because....

Premier Campbell and the economists and environmentalists that support his position are going nowhere near the solutions that we need to solve the problem. Instead of applying a solution based on ecology to our ecological predicament, they are applying an economic one. And not only that, they are applying it in such a way that its effects will be negligible if not counterproductive.

If Campbell and his environmentalist friends were serious about dealing with the environmental problems facing us they would dump the economists and economic approaches into the trash bin and address the issue from an ecological stand point. Carbon use must be reduced, as must a lot of other consumption, and the surest way to achieve that is to limit supply, not raise taxes. Limiting the supply of energy and other goods will of course curtail growth, a good thing for the environment, and a good thing for future humans, but not a good thing in the eyes of those who bankroll Premier Campbell. The Premier said that "climate change calls on all of us to rise above business as usual." And, it does, but you can bet that he won't.

Also in response to a discussion on an environment list where someone said: "the NDP stand is not effective and doesn't even have the appearance of effectiveness"

If we want an effective stand it will have to be for limiting the sale of fuel to a certain amount per time period. That is precise and gets us exactly the reductions that we want. Fairness in any limiting of supply would require a rationing plan, too, so everyone gets a fair share.

Does anybody think we can sell that idea? Until that is the plan all anyone is doing on this issue is shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

Tax shifting, neutral taxes, and so on are economic smoke and mirrors to make it look like something is being done while actually doing very little as far as significant effects go. These are a shell game concocted by economists to preserve the economy and the interests of the wealthy, not save the environment.

Campbell's plan is not only such a shell game, but has been put in such a way to foment divisiveness between the NDP and some environmentalists. No doubt that, more than any environmental concern, was the plan all along. People arguing over the merits of the Liberal vs NDP plans have gotten caught in this fly paper.

_______

Jerry,

You won't be surprised when I tell you we're all going to agree with you: rationing of oil isn't going to happen anytime soon. Most of us just weren't that enamoured of Stalinist economics.

However, the rest of your argument is mischievous in that it's really just a rationale for not doing anything about greenhouse gases caused by transportation, and while joining the Harperites is certainly an option, the consequences of such a policy aren't that attractive to many of us either.

You've (I suspect deliberately) misunderstood the point of carbon taxes: of course the tax solves nothing in itself; it isn't meant to. The tax merely makes the commodity more expensive. The expected consequences are that people will modify their behaviour by buying smaller vehicles, running them less, and pressing for improved public transit. It is also meant to encourage companies to find other ways of producing and using energy, and consumers to buy the resultant products. (I draw your attention to a tiny little report in yesterday's Report on Business, noting that Toyota has shifted its lines producing the Tundra truck to production of the Prius. Not a major shift, perhaps, but nonetheless indicative.)

Do economic incentives even work? Why was it we spent a lot of money to get rid of that old oil furnace and replace it with a high-efficiency gas one? Of course they do!

Yes, the oil companies are raking in huge profits, and yes, the carbon tax compounds the injury. So tax the oil company profits, and apply the money raised by carbon taxes to the social good, public transportation being a priority.

We can probably all agree that the global warming problem won't be solved without changing the attitudes and behaviours of the people on the planet. Carbon taxes won't do it all, but they can be part of the solution. At least they point in the right direction.

As for Campbell, it may well be that his motivations are all political, but he's done more to bring this defining issue of our times home to BCers than any other politician, and all the environmental organizations combined!
--Justus