From the Chesapeake Climate Action Network: Mike Tidwell, Executive Director

Compiled and edited by Ted Glick, CCAN National Campaign Coordinator

May 3, 2013

In This Issue:

#1 St. Louis Post Dispatch: A GOP-free market solution to climate change

#2 Scientific American: Why James Hansen stopped being a government scientist

#3 Huffington Post: Feinstein plans new “carbon fee” bill; argues against keystone, oil and gas subsidies

#4 Triple Pundit: Why we need a price on carbon

#5 Lincoln, Ne. Journal Star: Fee and Dividend support in the heartland

#6 The Chippewa Herald, Wi.: Climate fee offers road map to climate safety

#7 Wall Street Journal: Why we support a revenue-neutral carbon tax

 

#1 St. Louis Post Dispatch: A GOP-free market solution to climate change

“For conservative Republicans in Congress, they now have two choices. They can watch helplessly as President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency regulates greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other pollutants that warm the Earth. The better option for GOP members of Congress is to support a free-market solution to climate change. This year, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) introduced “carbon fee and dividend” legislation. Their bill starts a $20 per ton fee on coal, oil and natural gas when burned. Americans would then receive monthly rebates or “dividends,” to offset the increased prices associated with the fee.”
Read the full article: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/for-earth-day-a-gop-free-market-solution-to-climate/article_6f92792e-d029-5e56-a5bc-e955e4f8ab05.html

#2 Scientific American: Why James Hansen stopped being a government scientist

“His preferred solution? A cap-and-dividend system in which a price is put on any carbon-based fuel and the revenues collected are distributed to every taxpayer to offset increasing energy costs. After decades spent trying to move society as a scientist—including the first testimony to the U.S. Congress urging action on global warming in 1988—he will now focus on educating and influencing the public and policy leaders as an activist.”
Read the full article: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2013/04/12/why-jim-hansen-stopped-being-a-government-scientist-video/

#3 Huffington Post: Feinstein plans new “carbon fee” bill; argues against Keystone, oil and gas subsidies

“Senator Dianne Feinstein shared her plans with Fresh Dialogues to introduce a new “carbon fee” bill, during a press conference Wednesday in downtown San Francisco. “I think a carbon fee is growing in popularity,” said Feinstein, after an appearance at the San Francisco Commonwealth Club. Her plans follow President Obama’s SOTU call for “market based solutions to climate change,” and a growing consensus among experts in favor of using the taxation system to control carbon dioxide emissions.
Read the full article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-van-diggelen/feinstein-plans-new-carbo_b_3016159.html

#4 Triple Pundit: Why we need a price on carbon

“The financial burden, the health, safety and security impacts are being borne by the general public while the energy companies continue to amass stupendous profits. The video argues for a price on carbon that would force energy companies to share some of the burden, while at the same time encouraging people to use less, or shift to other, cleaner energy sources. It could also help to address the financial problems that threaten our economy.”
Read the full article: http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/04/price-on-carbon/

#5 Lincoln, Ne. Journal Star: Fee and Dividend support in the heartland

“Fee and dividend legislation would help us reduce CO2 emissions with an orderly, predictable, market-driven process and would demonstrate again our exceptional proficiency as a world leader, not only today, but for generations to come.”
Read the full article: http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letter-pass-fee-and-dividend-measure/article_de3a0f57-38f5-5474-a9f5-2d5f2c550fd2.html

“With the state suffering through one of the worst droughts on record, Nebraskans are getting a personal initiation into the perils of climate change. The best proposal I have seen would be to charge carbon producers a small fee that would then be returned to consumers. This fee and dividend program would not be a tax. This proposal offers a gradual approach to reduce our dependence on carbon-producing fossil fuels as we begin to ramp up renewal sources of energy in Nebraska such as our strong wind and solar energy potential.”
Read the LTE: http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letter-drought-shows-need-to-act/article_af766c44-32ac-5317-98fb-bb20f9502560.html?comment_form=true

#6 The Chippewa Herald, Wi.: Climate fee offers road map to climate safety

“A revenue-neutral fee on carbon would open an exit to safety by making fossil fuels’ market price reflect their true cost to society. Carbon fee and dividend legislation would place a gradually rising fee on each ton of carbon dioxide a fuel will emit. To protect consumers from the temporary rise in energy prices, all revenue would be returned to citizens.”
Read the full article: http://chippewa.com/news/opinion/columns/charles-carbon-fee-offers-road-map-to-climate-safety/article_bef70ae0-8ff4-11e2-b89c-001a4bcf887a.html

#7 Wall Street Journal: Why We Support a Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax, by George P. Shultz and Gary S. Becker

“We propose a measure that could go a long way toward leveling the playing field: a revenue-neutral tax on carbon, a major pollutant. A carbon tax would encourage producers and consumers to shift toward energy sources that emit less carbon—such as toward gas-fired power plants and away from coal-fired plants—and generate greater demand for electric and flex-fuel cars and lesser demand for conventional gasoline-powered cars. Revenue neutrality comes from distribution of the proceeds, which could be done in many ways. In any case, checks to recipients should be identified as ‘Your carbon dividend.'”
Read the full article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323611604578396401965799658.html

 

CCAN encourages readers of the Cap and
Dividend Policy Update to distribute it to others who might be interested. We welcome input on the contents of this publication and ideas for what could be included. Send to Ted Glick at ted@chesapeakeclimate.org.