I am especially intrigued by those carbon rationing schemes
which make the price signal two-dimensional: someone buying
gasoline has to pay a certain amount of money plus has to
surrender some of his or her carbon rations.  In practice it
is just swiping the credit card, but this one swipe debits
two different accounts.  The carbon ration is replenished
every month, and the beauty is that everybody gets the same
ration.  This sends a powerful message that the atmosphere
belongs to everybody.  The carbon ration amounts attached to
different commodities also make it easy for everyone to
know the carbon footprint of their consumption choices.  It
puts pressure on people, but this pressure is independent of
income, and it gives information which allows people to
re-shape their consumption habits in a climate-friendly way.

If you run out of rations, there are ways to buy more -- as
long as others stay below their rations.  Here carbon
rations are different from food rations in war times which
one was not allowed to sell or buy.  This difference is
logical: one cannot eat for others, but one can reduce one's
carbon consumption for others.  Many of the proposals I read
were not detailed enough to explain how this trading works.
I assume that there are frequent auctions where consumers
can buy and sell rations from each other, with the
institution issuing the carbon shares serving as a big
clearing house.  But some people may not want to be bothered
with the fact that carbon is rationed.  Perhaps for them
there is the option to buy rations on the spot market as
they purchase the rationed goods, but for this privilege
they have to pay a premium price.  There is a lot to think
about, but these are socialist thoughts, we want to prevent
the carbon rations from becoming capital.

In most proposals, this carbon rationing only covers part of
consumption: purchases of gasoline, electricity, and mass
transit.  There is no attempt to measure the carbon embedded
in goods people buy.  They must be covered by other
policies, for instance a carbon tax.  Theoretically the
cleanest way would be that the sellers of everything that
contains fossil fuels have to pass through the carbon
rations to their suppliers, and at the mine or wellhead or
import terminal, these carbon rations have to be returned to
the carbon bank.  But it would be too complicated to
implement this.  At least at the beginning.  If carbon
rationing works well in the areas where it is easiest to
implement, then maybe one wants to expand it later.

Joseph, you are right, the issue of Climate Policy is no
longer downloadable freely.

Hans.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to