What We Really Need To Solve The Climate Crisis Is A Global Tax Or Something

Personally, I’d recommend that all members of the Cult of Climastrology give up their own use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral, but, hey, they want everyone to suffer

The Real Cost Of A $50 Trillion Climate Change Push

In three weeks, the world’s leaders will begin to gather in Madrid for the 25th United Nations Climate Change Conference. The intensity of the global climate strikes this year suggests that the proceedings will be scrutinized as never before. But the decisions made, or not made, will also have repercussions for global markets.

We’re transitioning towards a lower carbon economy, albeit at a slower pace than needed to stay within a two degrees Celsius climate scenario (2DS). For companies that can build offshore wind installations, develop electric vehicles and manufacture renewable diesels, we see potential for material earnings growth. In Decarbonisation: The Race to Net Zero, we estimated that more than US$50 trillion of capital will need to be deployed into renewables, EVs, hydrogen, biofuels and carbon capture and storage over the next 30 years, putting US$3-10 trillion of EBIT up for grabs.

Decarbonising electricity is the largest opportunity to reduce carbon emissions, with the power sector responsible for a quarter of global emissions. Strong renewables growth should be achievable given the significant improvements we’ve seen in solar and wind economics. But costs continue to constrain many other clean technologies, including battery storage, green hydrogen, CCS and biofuels.

If governments are serious about halting climate change, some form of stimulus will be needed.

That means more money out of your pocket, in the form of taxation and higher energy costs, which means a higher cost of living, along with government limits on how you live your life.

Taxes should be another means of incentivizing investment in low-carbon technologies, but they remain ineffective. Even in Europe, where the carbon price has increased three-fold since the end of 2017, it remains far below the US$75 per tonne estimated by the IMF as necessary by 2030 to achieve a 2DS.

Even if the price of carbon rises to that level, a global tax is needed, through either a multilateral agreement or a carbon border adjustment. Domestic carbon taxes are unlikely to succeed in a world where many industries can move to regions with less punitive environmental regimes.

Well, that’s kicking the tax schemes up to 11, eh?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

One Response to “What We Really Need To Solve The Climate Crisis Is A Global Tax Or Something”

  1. formwiz says:

    Remember how Teach put up a piece about 11,000 climate scientists saying we need to reduce population?

    Turns out they were just random people.

    How many of Baghdadi Bunny’s “climate scientists” are just brainwashed Lefties?

Pirate's Cove