It is a well-known fact that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases cause an increase in the global temperature of the Earth. The gases become trapped in the atmosphere surrounding the planet and make it extremely difficult for heat to leave the atmosphere in the form of radiation. Since the middle of the 1900’s global temperature has increased steadily by about 0.60 C (“The Carbon Cycle: Feature Articles”), which has begun causing serious problems on the ecosystem of the Earth. Talk about instituting a tax on carbon emissions from cars and power plants has been debated for the past decade or so, with numerous questions as to what it would mean for not only the consumer and producer of said emissions, but also the atmosphere and environment which feels the most impact from an increased concentration of greenhouse gases. A tax such as this one needs to be looked at from all sides including the effect producers of coal and other types of popular fuel choices, individual households, and the government dictating what the law will entail. Predicting the effects on individual cases such as these allows for the prediction of how the law will affect a modern, energy-loving society like that of today. While it is pertinent to observe the effects a carbon dioxide emission taxation would impose on the political and economic environment, it is equally as important to observe the impact it could have on the biologic environment. By taxing carbon dioxide, the hope is to decrease the production of greenhouse gases being pumped into the atmosphere every year. This could have a tremendous effect on the concentration of greenhouse gases produced each year by encouraging people to drive less and think about how their carbon emissions affect the environment. According to Metcalf’s predictions, this taxation could help reduce carbon dioxide emissions by about 8% and other greenhouse gases by about 45% (Metcalf 5). Changes like these, even though seemingly insignificant, translate into incredible advancements in a greener form of living. With a decrease in greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere ocean acidification will decrease, natural flora will face less stress, and the frozen soil in northern regions will melt at a slower rate (“The Carbon Cycle: Feature Articles”). The installation of a law such as this one could drastically improve the amount of emissions given off by human energy production and reduce the effect that greenhouse gases pose on our environment and ecosystem.
Instituting a carbon tax seems to be a difficult step to take in the prevention of the greenhouse gas effect, however Metcalf lays out a plan that would make the installation of a tax such as this a smooth transition. By placing a $15 tax per metric ton on carbon dioxide emissions the United States would not only face an increase in revenue, estimated to be around $90 billion, but also see a decrease in the reliance on natural gas and coal products for fuel, ranging from 3.4 to 14.7%. Obviously from a decreased need for these types of biomass fuels, companies that make profit from these businesses will be relied upon less for their service, however would be compensated due to the nature of their work. These companies engage in sequestration activities by directly obtaining the product that is being taxed and would be eligible for a tax credit. (Metcalf 3-5).
In practical application this tax would look similar to the income tax that employers and employees face. An original raise in the price of gasoline for vehicles would be instituted and then depending on the amount made by the household per year, an environmental tax rebate would be divided up among the public. Individual households would receive a small bonus for participating in the carbon emissions tax. Initially, about a $0.13 raise in the price of gasoline would be the first thing the public would see from the tax, which could be criticized heavily. Many people would be against anything that raises the price per gallon of gasoline for vehicles, however the price fluctuates constantly, and this type of tax would compensate for this original increase in price with an environmental tax rebate. (Metcalf 10-12).
Lastly, by Metcalf’s suggestion, the government would use the money produced from the carbon emissions tax to fund research and development projects regarding large scale energy production. Another thing to fund from the tax would be the capture and storage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now, a difficult task to partake in. This would involve somehow extracting the emissions from the atmosphere and storing them underground somewhere. More research needs to be done on how this could be accomplished. An increase in the support for more efficient energy would be seen as well, forms of energy like that of solar and wind, which do not give off carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. (Metcalf 10-11).
Keeping in mind that the dollar value used to calculate these estimates was that of the year 2005, many of the numbers mentioned above would be larger today than a decade ago due to inflation. This means that not only would the initial revenue from the tax raise more than $90 billion, but also would mean an increased amount of money returned to the individual households for participating in the tax itself. (Metcalf 5).
A tax such as this one is crucial to the future that is being created by the reliance on fossil fuels and other biomass fuels. Since the industrial revolution the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has steadily increased due to the increase in the amount of energy modern society demands to keep progressing. The increase since before the industrial revolution to roughly ten years ago is about 100 parts per million, which does not seem like a significant number in the scope of the problem, however poses major threats to the ecosystem. (“The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles.”)
With green forms of energy becoming more and more popular it makes sense to implement a tax like this one sooner rather than later. With this tax other forms of energy, like solar, wind, hydroelectric, and nuclear, will become the preferred source of energy for households throughout America. This could potentially deter the practice of burning fossil fuels for energy almost entirely, assuming a 100% response rate, causing the production of greenhouse gas emissions to plummet. However, this would most likely not be the case because there are always skeptics of clean energy and at the current point in time these other sources of energy are not always the cheapest or easiest option to choose.
Things have been done to try and reduce the amount of emissions being pumped into the atmosphere from companies, some of which include using low sulfur coal, installing scrubbers to catch harmful sulfur oxides, researching methods of reacting the nitrogen oxides out of the fumes from the burning of coal, and even experimenting with different ways to remove ash particulates from the fumes. However, from combustion reactions such as the burning of fossil fuels, carbon dioxide is always a product and reducing the concentration of it is proving to be harder than one would think. (“Chapter 26: Energy and the Environment.”).
Major problems come from an increase in greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere, one of the more serious being ocean acidification. Carbon dioxide in the presence of water, like the ocean for example, will react to form a dilute solution of carbonic acid. Since the 1750’s the ocean’s pH, a numeric measurement of its acidity, has dropped by 0.1. This represents a 30% increase in acidity, which could be potentially devastating to marine life. Even a slight increase in acidity could be too much for marine microbes to survive in, causing a problem in the entire food chain if they were to start dying out. (“The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles.”).
Similar to the dying out of marine life, land plants also face more stress in the presence of increased carbon dioxide concentrations. The more concentrated the atmosphere is with greenhouse gases, the warmer the climate generally becomes, which in turn initializes a longer growing season for plants due to the favorable growing conditions. This can have positive effects on the amount of food that can be produced per season, however also causes a water stress on the plants, which now need more water to sustain a longer growing season. Plants that cannot find enough water to stay alive, dry out and become susceptible to ignition. This is the start of most wildfires. The burning of so much raw material at once gives off an incredible amount of carbon into the atmosphere creating even more of a problem. (“The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles.”).
Lastly, an increase in global temperature, increases the rate at which glaciers and the permafrost, frozen land in colder regions, melt. In the northern regions of the world, carbon deposits can be found within the frozen layers of soil, built up over thousands of years from the layers of fossils and plant matter beneath it. With the thawing of these areas, tons of carbon dioxide will begin seeping out into the atmosphere, contributing to the warming of the Earth even more.
In conclusion, a tax on carbon emission could be the push needed to kick-start a green energy revolution and turn away from dependency on fossil fuels. Emissions are only going to increase with the energy usage increasing, causing serious problems for the ecosystem and future of the planet. By taxing emissions, the goal is to decrease the usage of fossil fuels and other biomass fuels in favor of less harmful alternatives to energy. Obviously, the installation of a law such as this would take time and face quite a bit of backlash, however in the long term it may prove to be extremely useful for the prevention of further damage to the atmosphere.
Works Cited:
“Chapter 26: Energy and the Environment.” Energy and Society: an Introduction, by Harold H. Schobert, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2014, pp. 459-476.
Metcalf, Gilbert E. “Designing a Carbon Tax to Reduce U.S. Tax Emissions.” NBER Working Paper Series, National Bureau of Economic Research, Oct. 2008, citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.739.4139&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
“The Carbon Cycle : Feature Articles.” NASA, NASA, earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/page5.php.