Tuesday, August 7, 2012

McKibben Supports Barron for US Senate

"I’m awfully glad Bill Barron is running for Senate, because the idea he’s promoting—a fee-and-dividend plan to slow climate change and stop massive giveaways to the fossil fuel industry—couldn’t be more timely in this summer of record heat and drought.”
— 
Bill McKibben 7/17/12

Thursday, August 2, 2012

The World Will Not Need Liquid Fuels in 20 Years

In the July 23, 2012, edition of CQ Weekly, on page 1483, Randy Udall, brother of Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), is quoted as saying, regarding the potential for development of environmentally unsound oil shale development, “underlying it is this question that everyone is asking: ‘Well, where is the world going to get its liquid fuels 20 years from now?’” The truth of the matter is: there is no reason we should be using liquid fuels 20 years from now.

Thanks to the work of Mark Jacobson, of Stanford, and Mark Delucci, of UC Davis, we know it is possible to power the entire global economy without carbon-based fuels, by 2030, using technologies already in existence, and in use, in 2009. We also know it is possible to do this without spending more than we will have to spend to upgrade and maintain the existing energy infrastructure, designed to deliver fossil energy to consumers and industry.

Read More

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Laffer & Inglis for Carbon Tax (video)

Ronald Reagans chief economist Art Laffer and former South Carolina Congressman Bob Inglis, a conservative Republican, make the argument for a revenue-neutral carbon tax, for the Energy and Enterprise Institute.

Thursday, May 10, 2012

James Hansen Pushes Fee & Dividend in NY Times Piece

From James Hansen’s landmark article in today’s New York Times: a resounding endorsement of Carbon Fee and Dividend:

"We need to start reducing emissions significantly, not create new ways to increase them. We should impose a gradually rising carbon fee, collected from fossil fuel companies, then distribute 100 percent of the collections to all Americans on a per-capita basis every month. The government would not get a penny. This market-based approach would stimulate innovation, jobs and economic growth, avoid enlarging government or having it pick winners or losers. Most Americans, except the heaviest energy users, would get more back than they paid in increased prices. Not only that, the reduction in oil use resulting from the carbon price would be nearly six times as great as the oil supply from the proposed pipeline from Canada, rendering the pipeline superfluous, according to economic models driven by a slowly rising carbon price."

Spread the word. Ask those you know who care about the environment, the security of our democracy, and the future of our families and communities, to read this article and to share it: nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-climate.html

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Save our Climate Act of 2011 (complete transcript)

This is the full text of the Save our Climate Act of 2011, introduced by Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) in the United States House of Representatives, on October 25, 2011. 

SOCAtext.pdf Download this file

From Rep. Stark’s statement of introduction on the floor of the House

A steadily rising carbon tax will provide the certainty American businesses needs to make the long-term investments in new energy sources that will break our addiction to fossil fuels.  The United States can be the leader in green energy.  A carbon tax will help to unleash American innovation and create jobs.  That is why economists across the ideological spectrum—from Arthur Laffer and Alan Blinder on the right, to Jeffrey Sachs and Joseph Stiglitz on the left—have endorsed the idea.  Through border adjustments, my legislation will protect American manufacturers and ensure that imported goods from countries like China are not given an unfair advantage over American products.

At a time of deep budget cuts meant to reduce the deficit, a carbon tax can be part of the deficit solution.  My legislation will dedicate $437 billion toward deficit reduction over 10 years.  In addition, the Save Our Climate Act will protect families from increased energy prices.  Revenue generated will be distributed back to individuals as a yearly dividend to all Americans. The average dividend in the first year of the bill would be $172 per person, rising to $761 in the fifth year and $1126 in the tenth year. 

Saturday, April 30, 2011