Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Let's Price Carbon Now, For Business' Sake

By Gary Hirshberg, Stonyfield Farm and Steve Walker, NEWP
May 6, 2010   |   12 Comments

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.

12 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 12
May 7, 2010
Exergical analysis stress signal infer that the US should limit and put a price on carbon – right now NEXT get out of the way of US businesses striving to help them selves by helping India & China with IPRited decentralized technologies that has an exponential Von Neumann kind of growth that is amicable.
www.stirling-motor.com
Comment
2 of 12
May 7, 2010
While I agree that CO2 should be priced, you need to ensure that the rate is set high enough to provide a strong incentive to companies to actually cut emissions.

The European cap and trade system is riddled with flaws, the greatest of which are: allowing companies to predict their own CO2 emissions for the year (thereby allowing them to inflate their figures to gain more licenses); providing companies with licenses for almost the full predicted volume of CO2; and pricing extra licenses so low that there is no incentive to reduce emissions at all because it is cheaper in the short term to buy extra licenses than to implement efficiency measures. Thanks to market forces rewarding short termism, this seems to be what most businesses aim for rather than greater long term savings.

While paying to help developing countries implement renewable energy technologies and efficiency measures can only help mitigate climate change, it does not relieve western companies of their responsibility to reduce emissions in their operations as well.
Comment
3 of 12
May 7, 2010
Gary, you've definitely proven yourself as a leader in creating change when it comes to making yogurt and doing it in an environmentally responsible way. While a price on carbon may help to ween us off fossil fuels, I think that the list of innovations you've put in place at Stonyfield to save the amount of money you've saved speaks for itself.

If lawmakers can't rally around a price on carbon, why can't/don't they look to you and the others you mention to try to figure out how to incentivise more positive change by helping industry to be proactive in saving energy dollars, reduce CO2 emissions, and increase energy independence.
No image available
Comment
4 of 12
Anonymous
May 7, 2010
Naturally, someone in the biomass business would favor a tax on carbon because it would give him a competitive advantage, and someone in the food industry does not have strong competition from foreign vendors that benefit from much lower energy prices, so he too might favor such taxes. However, many other businesses would not fair as well under this proposal. Furthermore, there are not a lot of alternatives available at the moment for natural gas and oil usage so the tax, in the short term, would not spur innovation in alternative energies--it would merely depress the economy further. One might argue for a small and increasing tax on coal because coal-fired electricity generation does have alternatives (wind, natural gas, nuclear, geothermal, etc.) but the case for a broader carbon tax seems weak, especially considering the international nature of markets and the existence of more efficient alternatives (i.e., direct funding of R&D for energy research, etc.).

Some might be tempted to point out that biomass for heating is an extant alternative to natural gas heating, but biomass will only be able to meet a small percentage of the world's energy needs. We need a long term strategy that accelerates progress for scaleable alternatives rather than niche technologies. At this time, I don't see a carbon tax doing that especially effectively.
Steven
No image available
Comment
5 of 12
Anonymous
May 9, 2010
We live in a democracy. The first step is to educate the public as to why we need to "put a price on carbon". Otherwise people will feel like some guys in a smoke filled room have come up with yet another way to make money off the average working guys. To oversimplify this education, it's partly science, and mostly math. We need to explain how adding just a little more CO2 to the atmosphere (one half of one percent of one percent, i.e. .005%, i.e. 50 ppm) and going from 400 ppm to 450 ppm will have drastic negative effects. The visual proof of melting glaciers and sea ice makes this at least possible, but how can such a small change be so important? How do we know that increasing greenhouse gases will actually heat and harm the planet? Why is the bulk of the atmosphere, the N2 and O2, basically not involved? That is the science of light, electromagnetic waves and gaseous molecules. Illustrators, please illustrate
The math is easier. There is only about one million tons of atmosphere per person on the planet. There is not enough air to dilute our emissions. That is simple math. We all need to work these numbers and publicize them so that we can all agree to "put a price on carbon" as a united nation, not a specific industry.
Comment
6 of 12
May 9, 2010
It is almost boring when we must get messages from "mystery writers". If you truly believe what are saying, or writing, say so...and cknowledge who you are. Don't hide and keep sending messages from the mystery man or woman. If you believe what you are writing, have the "chutzpah" to sign your name after you try to tell us/me what to believe. My name is Ray, I live in/on a mountainside in Vermont. I am damn near 70 years young..and if you disagree with me tell me. I'm old enough to deal with it and not slit my wrists. Have a great day, whomever you may be.
No image available
Comment
7 of 12
Anonymous
May 10, 2010
Raymond, in comment #6, seems miffed about anonymous posts. I think he should be more focused on ideas than personalities. When someone googles my full name I like them to find my refereed publications and other works rather than a flurry of comparatively unimportant web comments so I much prefer anonymous commentary. As I know nothing about Raymond except his name and that he is 70 and seems to easily get annoyed, the distinction between anonymous commenters and named but unknown commenters seems too subtle to get worked up about.
Steven
No image available
Comment
8 of 12
Anonymous
May 10, 2010
The climate situation concerns 7 billion anonymous people on this planet. The famous who speak out, like Jim Hansen (or for an opposing view Freeman Dyson), have to defend their positions and post their credentials, it is part of their professional obligations. I, on the other hand, have no fancy credentials. I studied environmental engineering about 30 years ago. As if to spite me, world economies ignored the warnings. Look at Hummers, the Concorde, the street lighting, what a run it has been. Now the jig is up?

I do have hope that we can make a U-turn on our emissions, and that a carbon tax (or price on carbon) is logical and inevitable (the sooner the better). People may be suspect of this new tax, unless we all make an effort to educate each other about why it is necessary. The science and the math of global climate change are not about belief. When I study it (the size of the atmosphere, the number of people, the sequestered carbon we bring up and burn with such dedicated purpose) it is almost beyond belief. I do agree with Freeman Dyson that this huge on-going release of stored energy (sequestered carbon) has allowed mankind to do great things. If we apply the brakes to the fossil fuel economy we need not loose sight of that. Any kind of serious review of the situation tells us that apply the brakes we must. Thanks to Jim Hansen for his efforts to point this out. To me the missing pieces are the animated web sites, newspaper headlines, nightly newscasts and magazine articles that show how light and greenhouse gases interact so we can understand why the whole economy and infrastructure must change. Let's apply the brakes with some care as a united peoples. Understanding this science can help us implement the new infrastructure (e.g. scrolls, biochar, solar panels, gardens, tricycles, clotheslines). The original article is excellent and thank you for the opportunity to comment. I will remain anonymous, but hopeful and probably boring.
Comment
9 of 12
May 10, 2010
How about we cut state, local and federal taxes, 100%, on all AE infrastructure, equipment, labor, retrofits and cut taxs 100% for the sales and purchase of energy from ALL AE sources. Give our businesses the green $$$ incentive to adapt AE and they will do it for profit, not for some job killing carbon credit ponzi scheme, dreamed up by big government-wall street corruption.

Give the private sector and AE energy a level playing field and get the government OUT OF THE WAY.
Comment
10 of 12
May 10, 2010
Support for this type of, reality tech solution, write your congress Rep..........
If you, as I do, taxes should be cut in order to get the green economy($$$) into overdrive, tell your congrease person to support this bill....H.R. 4144:

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the investment tax credit for combined heat and power system property.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-4144 The Bill

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml Your Congrease Rep.
Comment
11 of 12
May 11, 2010
Cap and Trade is going to cost the taxpayer a lot of money at a time when they need all the help they can get. Before Cap and Trade government needs to level the playing field not just by removing subsidies from all forms of energy but level the permitting and licensing requirements as well; then cut capitalism loose.
Comment
12 of 12
May 12, 2010
Cap and Tax is Crime Inc., it has nothing at all to do with climate and everything to do with Progressivisimm Greed, money and power.

http://www.libertyjuice.com/2010/05/06/crime-inc/
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Ambient Technologies, Inc. GoGreenSolar.com Schletter Inc. Applied Energy Technologies (AET) EISENMANN Corporation AREDAY Endurance Wind Power
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters