Canadian Centre for Policy Studies: Eight Arguments against a Carbon TaxIn this Canadian Centre for Policy Studies report (released Sept. 2008), David Murrell reviews a list of reasons why he believes a proposed carbon tax would be damaging to the Canadian economy.
After describing the basics of the proposed carbon tax, Murrell provides eight reasons he believes the carbon tax will not achieve its stated goals:
EIA - Federal Financial Interventions & Subsidies in Energy Markets 2007From the EIA website,
This report responds to a request from Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee that the EIA update its 1999 to 2000 work on Federal energy subsidies, including any additions or deletions of Federal subsidies based on Administration or Congressional action since 2000, and providing an estimate of the size of each current subsidy. Subsidies directed to electricity production are estimated on the basis of generation by fuel.
From the report Executive Summary,
Notwithstanding the doubling of Federal energy-related subsidies and support between 1999 and 2007, and a significant increase in most energy prices over that period, U.S. energy production is virtually unchanged since 1999 ... Basic economic principles suggest that higher real energy prices together with the significant incentives provided to various production segments of the energy sector would tend to raise domestic energy production. A variety of factors unrelated to prices or subsidy programs such as State and Federal statutory limitations imposed on onshore and offshore oil and natural gas exploration in environmentally sensitive areas, uncertainty regarding future environmental policies possibly restricting future emissions of greenhouse gases, and declines in future production from previously developed domestic oil and natural gas resources may have impeded growth in energy production despite modest growth in consumption.
From the Congressional Research Service Website:
Any comprehensive approach to substantially reduce greenhouse gases must address the world's dependency on coal for a quarter of its energy demand, including almost half of its electricity demand. To maintain coal in the world's energy mix in a carbon-constrained future would require development of a technology to capture and store its carbon dioxide emissions. This situation suggests to some that any greenhouse gas reduction program be delayed until such carbon capture technology has been demonstrated. However, technological innovation and the demands of a carbon control regime are interlinked; a technology policy is no substitute for environmental policy and must be developed in concert with it.
NCC - Urgency of Sustainable CoalFrom the Introduction to the National Coal Council's latest report, the "Urgency of Sustainable Coal".
On October 12, 2007, the Secretary requested the National Coal Council conduct an additional study to “focus on several technological options to increase coal use consistent with the environmental goals of the country.” Pursuant to this request, the NCC submits the current report, The Urgency of Sustainable Coal. Significant energy-related events have occurred in the past several years that have far reaching implications for the United States and for the central role coal will play in the world’s future. The present 2008 report follows the Secretary’s directive and refines and extends the findings and recommendations in the earlier reports, particularly in regard: 1) Carbon management technologies; 2) Legal and regulatory issues; 3) Hybrid electric vehicles; 4) In-situ coal gasification and; 5) Converting coal to liquid fuel (CTL) and substitute natural gas (SNG).
Text from the Rand Corporation website,
Rand Impacts on U.S. Energy Expenditures & GHG Emissions of Increasing Renewable Energy Use
The penetration of renewable energy into the marketplace has been small, held back principally by their higher cost relative to fossil energy. RAND assessed the potential impacts on U.S. consumer energy expenditures and national CO2 emissions of producing 25 percent of U.S. electric power and motor-vehicle transportation fuels from renewable resources by the year 2025. The baseline for the comparisons was expenditures and CO2 emissions in 2025 as drawn from the reference-case tables of the Energy Information Administration's 2006 Annual Energy Outlook. The report shows that increasing renewables use can reduce CO2 emissions and enhance energy security by lowering the cost of imported petroleum. However, a large, inexpensive, easily converted biomass supply is necessary for significantly increased renewable-energy use to have a relatively low impact on consumer energy expenditures. Rapid progress also is needed in the technologies converting biomass feedstock into transportation fuels, and producing power at marginal wind sites. Without progress in these areas, the renewable-energy requirement could substantially increase consumer energy expenditures. Technical advances in provision of economically and environmentally sound biomass energy and wind power generation at lower-quality sites should be top priorities for increasing affordable supplies of renewable energy. The report replaces an earlier version withdrawn in 2006 to correct errors in modeling discovered by RAND post-publication.
Purchase the report or download a pdf version on the RAND website.
China Coal Industry 2007From the Executive Summary of China's Coal Industry 2007: Production, Consumption, and Outlook:
This in-depth study focuses on China’s coal industry and markets as they stand today and looks at the likely development for supply and demand over the next few years.
China is the world’s largest coal producer, with an output of 2.33 billion tonnes (bnt) in 2006, up by over 1bnt (79%) over 2000. Unsurprisingly, China is also the world’s largest coal consumer, accounting for one third of the planet’s coal use.Regardless of any international environmental pressure, coal will still play the leading role in Chinese energy consumption.
In a world context, in the six years to 2006, China added production of 1.1bnt, that is an additional industry well in excess of the size of the world’s second biggest producer, the US. In the next 10 years a further 0.8bnt will be added, almost as big again as that of the US.
China will not slow this growth because of international environmental pressures. The country’s massive stock of new power stations are much more efficient than the aging generation plant in North America and Europe. But there will be a lot more of them. Coal use will grow by 900mt between 2006 and 2011, reaching 3.3bnt.
You can read the remainder of the Executive Summary, review the report Table of Contents and see ordering information here. This report was prepared by Xinhua Info Link & the McCloskey Group (published by the McCloskey Group).
EIA Annual Energy Outlook
From the EIA website:
The Annual Energy Outlook 2008 (AEO2008) presents projections and analysis of US energy supply, demand, and prices through 2030. The projections are based on results from the Energy Information Administration's National Energy Modeling System. The AEO2008 includes the reference case, additional cases examining energy markets, and complete documentation.
Understanding Climate Change
This recent publication by the Fraser Institute acts as an excellent primer on the topic of climate change. Written so as to be usable by both the novice and the expert, the report explains the current understanding of,
The full report is available in pdf format on the Fraser Institute website.
This white paper, prepared by the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, describes the potential roles of various levels of government (federal, state, local, and tribal) in the development and implementation of carbon dioxide reduction programs, such as cap & trade.
The paper attempts to provide information on how governments can work together to create climate change mitigation strategies that are in line with broader federal programs. The paper also reviews the potential for governments to require industry to handle compliance costs for these programs.
CBO: Policy Options for Reducing CO2 Emissions
This report -- a publication of the U.S. Congressional Budget Office -- provides a detailed look at the policy options available (or currently being considered) by the Congress to reduce or eliminate U.S.-based CO2 emissions.
The report authors conclude that voluntary and incentive-based policies will provide the most effictive means of reducing emissions.
The most efficient approaches to reducing emissions involve giving businesses and individuals an incentive to curb activities that produce CO2 emissions, rather than adopting a “command and control” approach in which the government would mandate how much individual entities could emit or what technologies they should use.
[...]
Incentive-based approaches can reduce emissions at a lower cost than more restrictive command-and-control approaches because they provide more flexibility about where and how emission reductions are achieved.
The study compares the three most widely suggested incentive-based options being considered, a "tax on emissions, a cap on the total annual level of emissions combined with a system of tradable emission allowances, and a modified cap-and-trade program that includes features to constrain the cost of emission reductions that would be undertaken in an effort to meet the cap." After giving their consideration,
the study authors recommend that, if a climate policy must be undertaken,
A tax on emissions would be the most efficient incentive-based option for reducing emissions and could be relatively easy to implement.
In contrast,
An inflexible annual cap (one whose level was not affected by the price of emission allowances and under which firms would not be allowed to bank or borrow allowances) would be the least efficient option among those considered here, although it could be relatively easy to implement, depending on key design features. [...]
A cap-and-trade program that included a price ceiling (safety valve) and either a price floor or banking provisions could be significantly more efficient than an inflexible cap, although somewhat less efficient than a tax.
