$100 carbon tax by 2030 could save climate, say economists

Economists say countries should ramp up the price of carbon emissions to as much as $100 per metric ton by 2030 to stop catastrophic global warming.

Experts including Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz and former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern say should be taxed at $40-$80 per ton by 2020.

They say prices should rise to $50-$100 by 2030 to give businesses and governments an incentive to lower emissions even when are cheap.

In a report published Monday, they suggest poor countries could aim for a lower tax since their economies are more vulnerable.

The Trump administration has rejected calls to introduce a carbon tax in the United States, saying it would cost jobs.

European Union carbon prices stand at just under $6 per ton.


Explore further

Global emissions to leap 39 percent by 2030: US

© 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Citation: $100 carbon tax by 2030 could save climate, say economists (2017, May 29) retrieved 22 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2017-05-carbon-tax-climate-economists.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
33 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

May 29, 2017
It would unfortunately increase the price of renewable energy, as all the technology is produced with fossil fuels, and all the infrastructure to use it is based on fossil fuels, so the incentive would fail to materialize. Seriously. Carbon tax is simply whipping yourself for not doing what is currently un-doable because the alternatives are either too expensive, or politically unviable. It will only change things for the worse.

If the cost of carbon is increased, then whoops, the cost of e.g. solar panels goes up because the chemical energy to refine silicon comes from, guess what? And that's not the only step of the process that runs on fossil fuels because they're cheaper than using the renewable energy back on the same process.


May 29, 2017
A carbon tax makes sense only when the renewables industry is able to eat their own dog food, as a matter of expression. Not before.

May 29, 2017
In 20 years we will have fusion and fossil fuel will be obsolete. That is if we can get the money to fund MIT's SPARK and ARC. and we are not talking billions either.

May 29, 2017
In 20 years we will have fusion and fossil fuel will be obsolete. That is if we can get the money to fund MIT's SPARK and ARC. and we are not talking billions either.


And in 20 years, we may be only 20 years apart from the next 20 years mark.....ect ect....
Stop being a prophet. You suck at being a prophet.

May 30, 2017
Pardon the bee in my bonnet, but the sheer volume of dollar signs in this relatively short article is having an opposite effect on me; feels like I just got accosted by a used car salesman with bonus time shares in the global climate cottage industry.

May 30, 2017
Well of course it's got to be economists who are spewing this BS, not scientists.


RCB
May 31, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more