|
|
|
|
|
by WalterBright
2161 days ago
|
|
The most efficient solution is ridiculously simple - put a tax on the emission of pollution. Couple it with a corresponding tax reduction on productive behavior. This is based on the blindingly obvious maxim that if you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less, tax it. And by taxing pollution instead of regulating it, you generate revenue for the government. |
|
People in the us accept that the price of fuel goes up and down but they are the only ones. In other countries people riot when the cost of fuel goes up.
Many people have a lot of fear that tradable emission permits are an Enron-style scam that will suck money out of our pockets into somebody's pocket who will recycle 1% of profits back to politicians to maintain their privilege.
What we need to is either ban certain uses of fossil fuels or introduce an energy source that is so superior that people don't want to use fossil fuels. The latter is hard but doesn't violate the laws of physics, but any other kind of Collective action on climate violates the laws of social physics which are absolute for N > 10^9.