Entretenimiento

Consumers Will Pay For Carbon Pricing Costs

Libro «Abril golpe adentro» tiene edición en inglés: ¡Descárgala aquí!

More Info

Share Facebook Twitter Google + Linkedin Reddit Premium Content Consumers Will Pay For Carbon Pricing Costs By Irina Slav – Nov 22, 2020, 2:00 PM CST Join Our Community Carbon pricing sounds like the simplest solution to the world’s emissions problem: if you want to emit, you have to pay for it. Europe has pioneered carbon pricing efforts with its emissions trading system, but now these efforts are turning out to be insufficient. At the same time, there is a push in the U.S. to utilize carbon pricing as a means of dealing with climate change. But will it work?

There are two ways in which carbon pricing policies can be implemented: one is the direct charging of emitters for the carbon dioxide they release, and the other is the so-called cap-and-trade way, which Europe has adopted in its Emissions Trading System (ETS). Basically, the cap-and-trade approach allows emitters a small amount of free emissions, and if they pollute more, they need to either pay for additional allowances or offset the emissions by investing in clean energy.

In the United States, California is the poster child of climate change efforts and carbon pricing is part of its arsenal. The state also adopted a cap-and-trade mechanism in 2013 and has seen its emissions decline, as has Europe. However, in the context of the latest commitments on emission reductions, neither decline seems to have been enough.

According to an analysis in Boston Review, carbon pricing as we use it now is simply not the best political solution to the emissions problem. Citing California’s experience, the authors point out how thanks to the excess supply of pollution permits, the price of emissions has been lower than it should be in order to not just bring revenues into the state coffers but change the behaviors of companies, so they pollute less.

The authors attribute the inefficiency of California’s—and other places’—carbon pricing mechanism to fossil fuel companies’ interference, blaming them for turning the public against such measures while officially supporting them as a solution to the emissions problem.

Fossil fuel companies are indeed backing carbon pricing as a solution. Whether their motivations are as sinister as the authors of the Boston Review article suggest, or whether they welcome the straightforwardness of carbon pricing as a principle is not particularly relevant. What is relevant, according to that analysis, is changing the mentality of people so that they accept higher prices for a range of goods and services.

This is the ultimate drawback of carbon pricing: the companies that fall within its scope have to pay for allowances. They often pass on these additional costs to their customers. It was a proposed price hike for carbon that prompted the yellow vest protests in France, and these protests are one of the best illustrations of why the public is not a fan of such measures.

Related: Why Iraq Isn’t Producing 10 Million Barrels Per Day Yet

Yet if done right—with high enough carbon prices—this policy could offset other costs related to climate change, argue the authors of the Boston Review article. All we need is to make the people who will pay for these high carbon prices that their children will live in a cleaner world. Others—a team of researchers from Stanford—argue now is the best time to make carbon pricing work.

“When we think about long-term problems like the pandemic or climate change , it’s easy to assume that the solutions could conflict since they all require massive resources,” says the lead author of the study, Kian Mintz-Woo. “But what we describe in this article is how the context of the coronavirus crisis actually provides a unique opportunity for mutually reinforcing forward-thinking solutions to improve sustainability and wellbeing as countries recover.”

The argument: economies are already disrupted by the pandemic. One more disruption in the form of carbon pricing could pass more painlessly than it would in pre-pandemic times. What’s more, the current challenging environment could motivate the right kind of reactions to carbon pricing from the business world: focusing on sustainability rather than paying for carbon allowances.

Europe is already ramping up its carbon-pricing efforts, despite the pandemic that led to the biggest postwar slump on the continent. Bloomberg recently reported that the EU is planning a major overhaul of its Emissions Trading System that will result in not just higher prices for pollution but also extend its scope to include the shipping industry.

On the face of it, this would lead to higher prices for a lot of things at a time when millions of people are either furloughed or out of a job permanently because of the pandemic. This does not really make sound sense. But, say the authors of the Princeton study, it’s not high prices that have led to the slump in consumer spending during the pandemic. It was the shrinking economic activity in general that led to this.

The researchers may have a point, but the memory of the yellow vest movement may prove to be a bit too fresh in people’s memories. Still, the EU’s climate-related policies offer insight into what works and what doesn’t really, so other countries can pick and choose the measures that work best for them.

Carbon pricing is a case in point. Higher prices, necessary as they may be in order to force companies to change their behavior, could still meet with some public opposition, even in green Europe. This, in turn, would provide valuable insight for U.S. regulators and carbon pricing proponents on what (not) to do.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads from Oilprice.com:

Something Highly Unusual Just Happened To Chinese Crude Stockpiles

Process Banned By President Carter Could Solve U.S. Nuclear Waste Problem

A Major Oil Rally Could Be On The Horizon Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Home Oil Prices Rig Count Energy Energy-General Oil Prices Crude Oil Heating Oil Gas Prices Natural Gas Coal Company News Interviews Alternative Energy Nuclear Power Solar Energy Hydroelectric Renewable Energy Geothermal Energy Wind Power Fuel Cells Tidal Energy Biofuels Environment Global Warming Oil Spills Geopolitics Africa Asia Europe Indonesia International Middle East North America South America Finance the Economy the Markets Investing & Trading Reports Commodities Gold Silver Breaking News Premium Articles Community My Account Latest Discussions Energy General Oil Stocks & Prices Other Energy Topics All Prices OPEC Blends Canadian Blends U.S. Blends WTI Crude • 2 days 42.42 +0.52 +1.24% Brent Crude • 2 days 44.96 +0.76 +1.72% Natural Gas • 2 days 2.650 +0.058 +2.24% Mars US • 2 days 42.82 +0.47 +1.11% Opec Basket • 4 days 43.12 +0.07 +0.16% Urals • 5 days 39.60 +0.00 +0.00% Louisiana Light • 4 days 42.77 -0.07 -0.16% Louisiana Light • 4 days 42.77 -0.07 -0.16% Bonny Light • 3 days 44.56 +0.71 +1.62% Mexican Basket • 4 days 39.43 -0.08 -0.20% Natural Gas • 2 days 2.650 +0.058 +2.24% Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Marine • 3 days 44.16 +0.04 +0.09% Murban • 3 days 44.72 +0.16 +0.36% Iran Heavy • 3 days 42.13 +0.53 +1.27% Basra Light • 3 days 47.24 +0.58 +1.24% Saharan Blend • 3 days 43.89 +0.55 +1.27% Bonny Light • 3 days 44.56 +0.71 +1.62% Bonny Light • 3 days 44.56 +0.71 +1.62% Girassol • 3 days 46.10 +0.78 +1.72% Opec Basket • 4 days 43.12 +0.07 +0.16% OPEC Members Monthly Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Canadian Crude Index • 6 days 30.08 +0.61 +2.07% Western Canadian Select • 2 days 31.00 -1.41 -4.35% Canadian Condensate • 3 days 40.90 -0.11 -0.27% Premium Synthetic • 3 days 42.30 -0.11 -0.26% Sweet Crude • 2 days 37.00 -0.11 -0.30% Peace Sour • 2 days 34.90 -0.11 -0.31% Peace Sour • 2 days 34.90 -0.11 -0.31% Light Sour Blend • 2 days 36.90 -0.11 -0.30% Syncrude Sweet Premium • 2 days 37.50 -0.11 -0.29% Central Alberta • 2 days 34.90 -0.11 -0.31% Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Louisiana Light • 4 days 42.77 -0.07 -0.16% Domestic Swt. @ Cushing • 3 days 39.00 +0.25 +0.65% Giddings • 3 days 32.75 +0.25 +0.77% ANS West Coast • 6 days 43.46 -0.06 -0.14% West Texas Sour • 3 days 35.86 +0.09 +0.25% Eagle Ford • 3 days 39.81 +0.09 +0.23% Eagle Ford • 3 days 39.81 +0.09 +0.23% Oklahoma Sweet • 3 days 39.00 +0.25 +0.65% Kansas Common • 4 days 32.00 +0.00 +0.00% Buena Vista • 4 days 45.35 -0.13 -0.29% Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

Click Here for 150+ Global Oil Prices

1D 1M 3M 1Y All Charts Discussion Headlines 2 days Renewed Lockdowns Threaten More Refinery Closures In Europe   2 days The EV Revolution Is Threatening Long-Term Oil Demand Growth 2 days China Looks To Buy Stake In A Major Iraqi Oilfield 3 days UAE Clarifies Stance On OPEC Membership 3 days Tesla Slammed In Consumer Reliability Report 3 days UK Renewable Giant Suffers Despite Green Energy Push 3 days The EV Boom Is Sending Battery Metals Into The Stratosphere 3 days Goldman Sets $2,300 Price Target For Gold In 2021 3 days China Buys Into Mexico’s Emerging Renewable Energy Sector 3 days A Big Week For Venezuela’s Oil Industry 3 days Total Bets Big On Libya’s Oil Industry 3 days Oil Search Ready To Restart Alaskan Crude Production 4 days Oil Crash Continues To Claim Bankruptcy Victims In U.S. Shale Patch 4 days OPEC+ Needs To Compensate 2.35 Million Bpd Oversupply 4 days Trump Administration Holds Its Last Offshore Oil Auction 4 days Oil Majors Look To Bolster Security In Nigeria Amid Protests 4 days Indigenous Group Pours C$1B Into Keystone XL 5 days Oil Prices Under Pressure After API Reports Crude Inventory Build 5 days India Urges Oil Firms To Consider Foreign Partners To Boost Production 5 days Exxon’s Deepest Guyana Oil Well Disappoints 5 days COVID-19 Takes Major Toll On Australian Oil & Gas Jobs 5 days Equinor Sees COVID Accelerating Peak Oil Demand To 2027-2028 5 days Tesla Stock Soars After S&P 500 Addition 6 days OPEC+ Meeting Concludes With Support For Cut Extension 6 days Sudan To Offer 27 Oil Concessions In Global Bidding Round 6 days Oil & Gas Discoveries Resilient In 2020 Despite Pandemic 6 days U.S. Natural Gas Stocks Close To Record-High At Refill Season End 6 days Michigan Order Enbridge To Shut Down Line 5 6 days Twitter Blocks Iran Oil Minister’s Account 9 days OPEC+ Compliance With Cuts At 101% Ahead Of Crucial Meetings 9 days Libya’s Oil Production Exceeds 1.2 Million Bpd 9 days The Price Of Permian Acreage Has Slumped By 67% After Oil Price Crash 9 days PDVSA Chief Goes to Russia To “Deepen Ties” 9 days Enbridge Gets More Permits For Line 3 10 days Fuel Demand Slump Speeds Up Refinery Closures 10 days Japan Could Restart Nuclear Reactor Damaged In 2011 Disaster 10 days Energy Has Become Bargaining Chip In Brexit Talks 10 days Australia-China Spat Threatens LNG Deal 10 days African Oil Producers Face Slump In Production 10 days Record-Breaking Hurricane Season Took Major Toll On Gulf Of Mexico Production 3 minutes War for Taiwan? 7 minutes How China Is Racing To Expand Its Global Energy Influence 10 minutes Is it time to talk about Hydrogen? 1 min U.S. Presidential Elections Status – Electoral Votes 4 hours British PM Eyes Banning Gasoline and Diesel Car Sales 2 hours can Trump pardon himself? 18 hours CREO Syndicate – Ultrawealthy & Oil-igarchs Multi-Trillion Investments on Climate & Green 16 hours Trump Bans Americans From Investing In Chinese PLA-Linked Firms With Executive Order 17 hours Renewables deprogramming 2 days One drawback of an EV . . . . Breaking News: Renewed Lockdowns Threaten More Refinery Closures In Europe  

Find us on:

Latin America’s Next Oil Hotspot Suriname is making major moves…

Oil Prices On Track For A Third Weekly Gain With optimism growing around a…

The Oil Price Crash Has Made Diversification Vital For Gulf Nations The economic downturn and collapse…

Home Energy Energy-General Irina Slav

Irina is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry.

More Info

Share Facebook Twitter Google + Linkedin Reddit Premium Content Consumers Will Pay For Carbon Pricing Costs By Irina Slav – Nov 22, 2020, 2:00 PM CST Join Our Community Carbon pricing sounds like the simplest solution to the world’s emissions problem: if you want to emit, you have to pay for it. Europe has pioneered carbon pricing efforts with its emissions trading system, but now these efforts are turning out to be insufficient. At the same time, there is a push in the U.S. to utilize carbon pricing as a means of dealing with climate change. But will it work?

There are two ways in which carbon pricing policies can be implemented: one is the direct charging of emitters for the carbon dioxide they release, and the other is the so-called cap-and-trade way, which Europe has adopted in its Emissions Trading System (ETS). Basically, the cap-and-trade approach allows emitters a small amount of free emissions, and if they pollute more, they need to either pay for additional allowances or offset the emissions by investing in clean energy.

In the United States, California is the poster child of climate change efforts and carbon pricing is part of its arsenal. The state also adopted a cap-and-trade mechanism in 2013 and has seen its emissions decline, as has Europe. However, in the context of the latest commitments on emission reductions, neither decline seems to have been enough.

According to an analysis in Boston Review, carbon pricing as we use it now is simply not the best political solution to the emissions problem. Citing California’s experience, the authors point out how thanks to the excess supply of pollution permits, the price of emissions has been lower than it should be in order to not just bring revenues into the state coffers but change the behaviors of companies, so they pollute less.

The authors attribute the inefficiency of California’s—and other places’—carbon pricing mechanism to fossil fuel companies’ interference, blaming them for turning the public against such measures while officially supporting them as a solution to the emissions problem.

Fossil fuel companies are indeed backing carbon pricing as a solution. Whether their motivations are as sinister as the authors of the Boston Review article suggest, or whether they welcome the straightforwardness of carbon pricing as a principle is not particularly relevant. What is relevant, according to that analysis, is changing the mentality of people so that they accept higher prices for a range of goods and services.

This is the ultimate drawback of carbon pricing: the companies that fall within its scope have to pay for allowances. They often pass on these additional costs to their customers. It was a proposed price hike for carbon that prompted the yellow vest protests in France, and these protests are one of the best illustrations of why the public is not a fan of such measures.

Related: Why Iraq Isn’t Producing 10 Million Barrels Per Day Yet

Yet if done right—with high enough carbon prices—this policy could offset other costs related to climate change, argue the authors of the Boston Review article. All we need is to make the people who will pay for these high carbon prices that their children will live in a cleaner world. Others—a team of researchers from Stanford—argue now is the best time to make carbon pricing work.

“When we think about long-term problems like the pandemic or climate change , it’s easy to assume that the solutions could conflict since they all require massive resources,” says the lead author of the study, Kian Mintz-Woo. “But what we describe in this article is how the context of the coronavirus crisis actually provides a unique opportunity for mutually reinforcing forward-thinking solutions to improve sustainability and wellbeing as countries recover.”

The argument: economies are already disrupted by the pandemic. One more disruption in the form of carbon pricing could pass more painlessly than it would in pre-pandemic times. What’s more, the current challenging environment could motivate the right kind of reactions to carbon pricing from the business world: focusing on sustainability rather than paying for carbon allowances.

Europe is already ramping up its carbon-pricing efforts, despite the pandemic that led to the biggest postwar slump on the continent. Bloomberg recently reported that the EU is planning a major overhaul of its Emissions Trading System that will result in not just higher prices for pollution but also extend its scope to include the shipping industry.

On the face of it, this would lead to higher prices for a lot of things at a time when millions of people are either furloughed or out of a job permanently because of the pandemic. This does not really make sound sense. But, say the authors of the Princeton study, it’s not high prices that have led to the slump in consumer spending during the pandemic. It was the shrinking economic activity in general that led to this.

The researchers may have a point, but the memory of the yellow vest movement may prove to be a bit too fresh in people’s memories. Still, the EU’s climate-related policies offer insight into what works and what doesn’t really, so other countries can pick and choose the measures that work best for them.

Carbon pricing is a case in point. Higher prices, necessary as they may be in order to force companies to change their behavior, could still meet with some public opposition, even in green Europe. This, in turn, would provide valuable insight for U.S. regulators and carbon pricing proponents on what (not) to do.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads from Oilprice.com:

Something Highly Unusual Just Happened To Chinese Crude Stockpiles

Process Banned By President Carter Could Solve U.S. Nuclear Waste Problem

A Major Oil Rally Could Be On The Horizon Download The Free Oilprice App Today