My blog on 13th Feb challenged Stroud District councillors who were circulating a plea to sign the road pricing petition to think again. My piece has led to many comments sent to me by councillors, some supportive, some dismissive...one questioned carbon allowances. They made many useful points - here is my quick response to them:Thanks for your comments - You are right there is much to clarify re personal carbon allowances. I too, have concerns that it could be an ID card and also be open to fraud. There is however growing support across parties for this move and I strongly welcome the Government looking at it further. Here are some bits written earlier that may explain more - to me it is the fairest way forward. Other taxes and measures are often seen as unfair by people, often hit poorer sections of the population harder and can also have other unintended consequences. All the best - Philip
How would it work?
Domestic Tradable Quota for carbon is a Green Party policy which aims: a) To reduce the UK's carbon emissions in line with the target of a 60% reduction by 2050. b) To change the way we as a society view carbon emissions by making each of us personally responsible for our own carbon footprint. The system of tradable quotas covers all emissions of carbon dioxide produced by the burning of fossil fuels as well as: a) Purchase of electricity (from non-renewable sources) b) Air flights c) Direct purchase of fossil fuels (gas, coal, petrol, diesel, fuel oil). The total annual carbon quota is equal to current total carbon emissions.
The quota is then reduced annually in line with agreed targets. A proportion of the total quota is distributed by the government to all eligible adults in the UK for personal needs (all adults receive the same quota). The remaining quota is then sold to organisations (public, private and voluntary) through a system set up by the government. Another system is set up by the government for people and organisations to buy and sell quotas.
New infrastructure would be needed but much already exists: bank cards could store both pounds and carbon points. When we buy electricity, gas and fuel, we use our carbon points, as well as pounds.
Useful discussion here.
Benefits?
People on low incomes are likely to benefit as they will be able to sell their excess allowances. People on higher incomes tend to have higher carbon emissions due to higher car ownership and usage, air travel and tourism, and larger homes. A tradeable personal carbon allowance is more empowering than many forms of regulation, as it allowed citizens to make trade-offs rather than banning them from certain activities or goods, or taxing them heavily. It is also empowering because many citizens want to be able to do their bit for the environment and tackle climate change, but there is no measurable way of guiding their decisions.
The Sustainable Development Commission have said that it would provide a "virtually guaranteed" way of reducing fossil fuel emissions by 60 per cent by 2050. They go onto say that domestic tradeable quotas have many advantages over carbon taxes, not least because they are independent from political control.
Kevin Anderson, of the Tyndall Centre, has said: "Once you have accepted that we need a reduction of 60 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 - which it seems now that all parties have - you need to start soon. We saw what the public thought of carbon taxes in the protests over the fuel tax escalator. The beauty of personal carbon allowances is that you only need to make about a 1.25 per cent reduction in carbon emissions every year. This is a way that enables us to make the necessary annual changes without radical adjustments to our lives. It is about making the small changes year by year. It won't stop us going on holiday. But it might constrain how many times we fly. This could be up and running within four to 10 years."
RSA have an interesting project:
http://www.rsacarbonlimited.org/emissions/default.aspa
There are also Carbon Rationing Action Groups getting established:
http://www.carbonrationing.org.uk/topics/carbon-allowance
Including in Cheltenham:
http://theonetonners.blogspot.com/
1 comment:
I've had various correspondence with other councillors on this - here is one of the emails which has a bit more info on this topic:
I do agree there is work to be done to make it workable - trials or a pilot are needed - implementation is so far uncosted - but importantly the cost to the Government and taxpayers is only the cost of administering the scheme: no expensive grants or tax breaks are required.
Any answer to climate change is not going to be easy - and as noted there are many advantages to this scheme including most importantly that it doesn't impact unfairly on the poor. For this reason alone it is hugely positive compared to other schemes.
I agree that some people will still be hit harder - the economy will adjust - nurses will get paid more if needed to travel more in rural areas or they will choose to live nearer their work as many of us will be encouraged to do in future. Infact discouraging the ever growing time people commute can only be a good thing for family life, reducing stress and more!!
You note that much can be achieved through persuasion and encouragement and new technology - and I agree but the latest figures from the IPCC show we have to take radical action now - we are just no where near getting even slightly close to what is needed - I don't believe that it is possible to do it with encouragement and the promise of new technology. Certainly some projects including tidal (eg lagoons) offer significant possibilities that as you note are being grossly underfunded and supported by the Government - indeed this trading scheme would encourage their growth.
From a political standpoint, the personal tradable carbon schemes have the attraction that it is likely to create at least as many winners as losers (if the right number of permits are issued). This is because many people with relatively small incomes are likely to have surplus carbon rations that they can sell for cash. By contrast, as you suggest carbon taxes, often promoted as the way to discourage the burning of fossil fuels, mean that we are all losers (apart from the Government who collects the taxes) and, apart from taxes on air travel, they are likely to hit poor people disproportionately hard. Hence personal tradable carbon schemes are likely to be much less of a political hot potato than carbon taxes.
Another political plus is that this is an objective measure that is based on the reductions in CO2 emissions that must be achieved - thus it frees politicians from pressures to do less than what is needed to achieve those reductions.
Another plus is that the scheme is an essentially simple mechanism that will produce a whole raft of incentives to reduce CO2 emissions, right through the economy. The main alternative is a relatively complex combination of carbon taxes, grants, tax breaks, feed-in tariffs, renewable obligation certificates, subsidies, quangos, exhortation and special schemes, a system that is likely to create many anomalies and contradictions.
Carbon rationing (for businesses and individuals) also gives the Government much more direct control over levels of CO2 emissions than any other system. Since there is a fairly direct relationship between the number of permits issued and the amount of CO2 that can (legally) be emitted, policies are based on relatively objective measures. By contrast, levels of tax breaks, subsidies, feed-in tariffs etc depend on relatively subjective judgements about what the best technologies may be and how much support they deserve.
Another potential advantage and area that still needs work is in connection with the problem of what to do about goods that are produced abroad with lots of CO2 emissions and then imported into the UK. Those emissions should really count as part of the UK's emissions, otherwise there will be a great incentive to move all manufacturing to countries with very lax controls over CO2. There are at least two answers to this problem:
- One is to create some kind of "World Carbon Organisation" that would regulate carbon emissions in every country, in much the same way that the World Trade Organisation regulates trade in countries that subscribe to the organisation. This idea has been promoted recently by the UK Conservative Party - good on them!
- Until there is such a body, and it may be a long time coming, personal tradable carbon provide a partial solution. All goods imported from abroad would be assessed, and personal tradable carbon allowances would be attached to each product line in proportion to the amount of CO2 that is released in its production. This would raise the price of 'dirty' products and provide a clear incentive to the producer countries to clean up their act. It would also help to create more of a level playing field for UK-based manufacturers. Carbon taxes could be used in a similar way but, as described above, these provide a much less direct means of controlling CO2 emissions than personal tradable carbon allowances.
I didn't mean to write so much but ended up using part of a letter from another source - apols for making it too long but it was also good to remind me about all the advantages! All the best - Philip
Post a Comment