Argumentative Essay on Carbon Tax as a Solution to Climate Change

Introduction

Climate change has been the most global partisan environmental issue. Most of the conservatives have not been recently inquisitive about the issue and nor has there been any suggestions on whether human beings are the root cause of the activities leading to climate change. There have been projections of catastrophic environmental damage over the coming years as far as conservatives, and other researchers remain silent regarding the causes of climate change including greenhouse gas emissions. Most of the proposals of addressing the cases of global climate change, as well as the focal point of various local legislations, encompass other systems other than carbon tax projects. Through such systems, the prices of carbon in the market can be determined effectively hence, allowing the consideration of externalities in the issue. However, these solutions are capped with a lot of challenges such as being uncertain about the price reductions, the possibility of high political pressure meant to relax the cap system, issues in setting baselines for emission reduction targets, and long time required for implementation because of a long rule-making process (NEI, "An Explicit Formula"). One of the practical approaches to addressing the issue of climate change is the imposition of the carbon tax (Lee et al. 2). Therefore, debate exists on whether carbon-tax is an effective and efficient market-based approach to reduce carbon dioxide emissions hence, addressing the challenge of climate change. Even with various challenges such as political resistance, benefit uncertainty, tax exemption, and coordination, the effectiveness of the carbon tax system can be seen in various dimensions including its simplicity, ability to collect revenue, cost certainty, and its ability to signal consumes of pollution.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

A carbon tax system is also easier to implement than other ways of addressing the challenge of climate change (Liu et al. 400). Its enforcement is also easier and simpler to adjust regardless of the market-based being weak or strong. The system is easy in such a way that tax is imposed at a certain price per ton of carbon content on the various products of carbon including oil, coal, and natural gas. For instance, in Australia, it is recorded as $23 per ton (metric ton) (Carbon Tax Center, "Where Carbon Is Taxed"). At the same time, the solution provides an opportunity for realizing an easy way of combating the issue without implementing complex regulatory laws (Lee et al. 2). This tax is implemented at the time of extraction of the products or at their importation for such cases hence, its imposition on a small number of taxpayers. Additionally, its simplicity can be perceived when credits are offered for some carbon sequestration projects and others that may be effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Other methods are complicated as a result of their baselines, which would require quite concise explanations on the needs of establishing the systems. Various allowances are also a challenge to other methods compared to the carbon system as their creation would be dependent on the proposals. Constant monitoring is also required for alternative ways of addressing climate change compared to implementing the carbon tax system. The carbon system does not require any allowances hence, no need to determine if the allowances are to be used twice or any other complications. Additionally, there are offsets for the sequestration of carbon and other related projects, which are more complex compared to the credits on the liability of carbon tax. Most of the differences are inherent, especially before any proposals or implementations. The carbon tax system is also tried as there have been numerous economy-wide carbon-tax systems on various carbon products (Robson 23). The carbon tax system is, therefore, not a new and neither inherently separate legislation, as it is an issue being looked at globally. Additionally, as long as the body implementing the carbon tax system has to experience in previous enforcement, it might be as well easy to implement the carbon tax system. There is also simplicity in the system as there are no collateral issues including the need of commission bodies that set the rules governing the implementation of the systems. For carbon tax, only collections are done minus deductions, as it is a federal tax with no unnecessary implications. Therefore, a carbon tax is the simplest and most effective way of addressing the issue of global climate change as the system can only be fixed into an economy for which it is suitable (Harald and Andrew 15).

Implementation of a carbon tax could also be a contributor of revenue that can be used in ways of funding researches and coming up with innovative ways and alternative sources of energy and tax credits (Liu et al. 402). These measures and outcomes can offset the regressive effects of the carbon tax, as compared to other measures that cannot have solutions to address arising challenges. Besides, there are proposals to eliminate the regressive effects of carbon taxation. There have been instances of revenue neutrality proposals, which enhance the elimination of the effects. These regressive effects ought to be addressed but could alternatively be used in the provision of tax credits for the proposal and implementation of alternative energy sources. This arises as a result of the positive externalities resulting from the development of these alternative sources. Revenue collected can also be used in support of carbon sequestration projects and other viable projects that can be used in the reduction of greenhouse gases (Harald and Andrew 15). The use of these revenues is an advantage as there is a reduction in the 'Benefit Uncertainty' which is one of the main concerns of the carbon tax system. Generation of revenue is also crucial for the government to realize usefulness in the system hence, the reduction of political opposition to increasing taxes. The much revenue created by carbon taxation can result in a more significant potential for the support of research and development activities as well as the innovation of carbon tax alternatives. Taxation on coal, natural gas and oil are also implemented singularly, and any segregation would lead to resistance by the other products. The enactment of tax, as well as the generation of revenue by the carbon tax system, is, therefore, more visible and viable than other effects from rival systems of addressing climate change.

There is also an assurance of cost certainty on the carbon tax. Such costs include the amounts and incidences of the tax (CTC, "Mythbusting"). It is through cost certainties that businesses can plan and secure more in the knowledge that any increase in the tax rate would require negotiations by the Congress. Such actions enhance more security on costs related to any associated system. As a result of the security on costs, there would be no effect as a result of future technologies arising from cost variations. Therefore, it becomes easier even to predict the time required for the carbon tax program to be successful in its pre-defined achievements. Imposition of a carbon tax may allow a market to be accountable for various societal costs of carbon dioxide emissions hence, enhancing the reduction of emissions. The carbon tax is mainly imposed on coal, natural gas, and oil, which are produced locally or imported into the country of concern. Compared to other programs, carbon taxation has no unnecessary complications as a result of cost uncertainty from banking provisions (Liu et al. 400). Additionally, no sacrifices can be made on the benefit uncertainty hence, the provision of cost security. Therefore, in the carbon tax system, there is more reality in benefit certainty than an illusion in cost uncertainty hence, a definite assurance.

With the carbon tax system, a clear signal is provided to polluters. Implementation of a carbon tax can be, therefore, effective during implementation hence, the easiest way of navigating through the solution to reducing greenhouse gases. Compared to the other systems, the method can be verified as the best way to come up with innovative and creative ideas as the field of carbon taxation is not limited than other fields (Liu et al. 401). The challenge of greenhouse gases poses negativity on externality on other uses hence, a requirement to internalize the associated costs, which can only be done through paying of tax. Additionally, no complications are available regarding the message to be conveyed about pollution. People may realize by themselves that greenhouse gas emissions are costly and even though most of them can address the tax requirements, they can be liable for arising societal costs. Various complications are not available for carbon taxation compared to other programs, which would instead allow users to get necessary licenses to allow for pollution. It has been evident that most of the activities that led to the outcome of a rise in greenhouse gases have been legitimate and positive until the effects of the gases were realized. Such activities may include industrial productivity that enhances job creation. However, additional collective costs have lately been realized and taxing them can lead to a forceful acknowledgment of the costs in an inevitable way (CTC, "Mythbusting"). Therefore, any ease in conveying messages about pollution, such as one created by the carbon tax system could lead to the effectiveness of such advantageous programs.

There, however, are little practical limitations accompanying the carbon tax system. For instance, the most common foreseen challenge is the enactment of tax legislation in strict nations such as the US. Most of these legislations can lead to instabilities in energy prices, which is in negative favor of the carbon tax system. Additionally, the carbon tax system is seen as a tax by itself. Any proposals made regarding the carbon tax system could lead to lesser political consequences, particularly in the segregation of revenue, which is in turn used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This remains a challenge, and any mitigation on greenhouse gas emissions would mean the need for politicians to face down inevitable resistance regardless of the system being implemented (Lee et al. 3). Moreover, groups such as industry coalitions that see benefits in other systems could as well oppose the carbon tax system. These could particularly include the individuals that see the essence of acquiring more income through sales of excess allowances. However, a carbon tax can still have supporters, which include the people who prefer cost certainty among other advantages of the system.

Benefit certainty has also not been validated as an advantage to the implementation of the carbon tax. No assurance can be given regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from a provided tax level. Upon failure of the benefits, the associated costs would need to be raised hence, an uproar in a new political opposition that could defeat tax increase. In the long run, environmental benefits of the tax could be limited hence, a limitation in the entire system. However, the tax rate can be easily adjusted regardless of political oppositions (CTC, "Mythbusting"). Additionally, the desired level of emissions matches the global level and not a country's particular level of emission, therefore, the difficulty in achieving benefit uncertainty. However, easing the process would require the participation of large developing countries in negotiating for benefit certainty, which is more practical and more straightforward compared to other programs and systems.

The carbon tax is also subject to pressure in the provision of permanent solutions regarding the exemption of affected areas, which would consequently affect the benefit uncertainty...