Support for carbon tax grows when revenue fuels renewable energy

Jul 23, 2014 by Greta Guest

A carbon tax with revenues used to fund renewable energy programs gained support from 60 percent of Americans, according to a University of Michigan poll.

That's the highest among tax options presented and one that crossed the political divide with majorities of Democrats, Republicans and Independents saying they would support the tax, according to the National Surveys on Energy and Environment.

The survey is a joint effort of the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy at U-M's Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy and the Muhlenberg Institute of Public Opinion at Muhlenberg College in Allentown, Pa.

"Conventional wisdom is that is a political non-starter," said Barry Rabe, U-M professor of public policy and director of the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy. "But there may be broader support for such a tax than is commonly believed, depending upon how revenues from that tax are used."

Congress is not actively considering legislation, however, the Obama administration has continued to pursue regulation of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas under the Clean Air Act. Climate change policy is also being pursued by a number of states, including 10 committed to some form of cap-and-trade.

Economists have long argued that market-based emissions policies, such as a carbon tax or cap-and-trade, are superior to technology mandates or performance standards and they are operational abroad. Recent Obama administration steps do not create a national market-based system but leave open the option that states might establish them as a way to reach federal targets for reducing emissions.

The survey also found:

  • A revenue-neutral carbon tax, in which all tax revenue would be returned to the public as a rebate check, received 58 percent support.
  • Only 38 percent of respondents supported a carbon tax when revenues would be used to reduce the federal budget deficit.
  • Support for a carbon tax stood at only 34 percent when no explanation of revenue use was given and dropped further to 29 percent when a specific cost was added.

The random telephone survey of 798 American adults was conducted March 24-April 9, 2014. The survey had a margin of error of 3.5 percent. The report was authored by the late David Amdur, Muhlenberg College professor, Rabe, and Muhlenberg Institute of Public Opinion director Chris Borick.

Explore further: If global warming is real, why was it so cold and snowy last winter?

More information: The survey results are available online: closup.umich.edu/issues-in-ene… osed-use-of-revenue/

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Poll: Americans back climate change regulation, not taxes

Feb 07, 2013

Now that President Obama has put climate change back on the table in his second inaugural address, a new national poll finds growing public support for regulating greenhouse gas emissions and requiring utilities to switch ...

US housing policies increase carbon output, research finds

Jun 16, 2014

Land use policies and preferential tax treatment for housing – in the form of federal income tax deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes – have increased carbon emissions in the United States by about 2.7 ...

Recommended for you

Putting a value on what nature does for us

Sep 12, 2014

A new online resource, developed by researchers at the University of Cambridge in collaboration with other organisations based in Cambridge, helps those in both the public and private sector see how changes ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Floyd_Howard_Jr_
2 / 5 (4) Jul 23, 2014
We need to put an emissions tax on any intestinal flatulence based on the decibel level of the escaping gasses! Monitoring stations could be created that would contain high amp microphones that would pinpoint any abrupt animal discharges of methane gas. NSA could oversee the technical operations and Homeland Defense could then arrest the miscreants and round up the animals. Studies have shown that most of the methane flatulence comes from Washington DC! We need to tax the government first until they cannot print any more money and then every living thing that breaks wind. Soon liberal progressives will decriminalize drug crime, rape and child molestation and use the money they save to line the pockets of global warming and climate change Democrat alarmists!
howhot2
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 23, 2014
We need to put an emissions tax on any....

Or, We could do like the article said and implement a carbon tax that funds the installation of renewable energy sources. Instead if listening to these bovinatious spungaform deceptiCONS and their plan's, I say, we should implement a carbon tax right now and use the funds to install renewable energy sources on homes, on businesses, on cars and streets in the way of grant's tax write downs, and other subsidies!

The benefits are immediate, reduced CO2 from competitive energy exchanges and reduced long term sustainability from the renewable energy sources. Also the security that comes with managing your own energy use and production.