Activists Can't Agree on How to Fight Climate Change. The IMF Says Just Do Something.




 

Activists, politicians and economists are forever arguing over the best way to address climate change: carbon tax or Green New Deal; both or neither, or a mixture of elements from each. A new International Monetary Fund (IMF) report released Thursday cuts through that noise: any aggressive policy, it says, is better than nothing at all.

"We definitely want action to be taken," says Paolo Mauro, deputy director of fiscal affairs at the IMF, who oversaw the report. "We're not religious about any particular type of measure."

The new report comes as a range of different climate policies are under consideration in the U.S. Proposals for a Green New Deal - an ambitious spending program aimed at eliminating emissions and funding social programs - have garnered the most attention in recent months. All the major Democratic presidential candidates have embraced some form of a Green New Deal, and activists have pushed aggressively for such a program. But proposals for a carbon tax have also been gaining momentum on Capitol Hill. U.S. lawmakers are currently considering drafts for several new carbon tax proposals.

The IMF report does not provide a specific policy prescription. Instead, it assesses a variety of different proposed climate policies, including a carbon tax, an emissions trading system, regulations and a so-called "feebate" system in which polluting is penalized and those who reduce emissions are rewarded. The IMF report concludes that lawmakers must craft rules that work within their own countries' political context.

Still, while taking an even-keeled look at several policies that would effectively reduce emissions, the IMF report does put a thumb on the scale. It concludes unequivocally that a carbon tax is the most "single, most powerful and efficient tool" to drive a reduction in emissions. It would push polluters to reduce carbon emissions across all facets of the economy-and it's easier to implement than some alternatives.

One of the benefits of a carbon tax, the report says, is that it's easier to standardize across borders. More than 70 countries have committed to eliminating their carbon footprint by 2050, but many others - including the biggest emitters, like the U.S. and China - have lagged behind. A carbon tax offers a uniform approach to compare each country's progress and to form coalitions across borders. "If a country has a straightforward carbon tax," says Mauro, "it's a lot easier to compute how much action has been taken."

For those nations that don't implement a carbon tax, economists will need to calculate an implicit carbon price, a tricky but doable proposition, report authors say. The IMF found that to keep temperatures from rising more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century, the price on carbon needs to reach $75/ton by 2030.

Authors behind the IMF report argue that activists need not choose between a carbon tax and a Green New Deal-type spending program: a carbon tax can - at least in part - help defray the cost of a Green New Deal. It's an idea that has caught on in some policy circles, even if it hasn't risen to the forefront of the climate policy discussion. TIME reported in July that dozens of members of Congress who support Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal resolution also back a carbon tax.

Democratic Rep. Salud Carbajal of California, who supports both the Green New Deal and a carbon tax, echoed the need for action of any kind. "I'm for anything and everything," he told TIME in July, "that moves the ball forward."

The report also addresses some of the common critiques leveled against a carbon tax, including that the policy would hit the poor hardest. The report authors emphasize the wide range of potential uses for revenue derived from a carbon tax, from potential tax breaks for low-income people to helping communities whose livelihoods will be damaged by the transition away from fossil fuels.

What's clear is that the consequences of inaction will be severe. In a landmark report released last year, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that a rise in temperatures of just 1.5°C could lead to ecological, economic and humanitarian disaster with millions displaced and severe impacts altering human civilization as we know it. The IMF under Christine Lagarde has prioritized the issue citing the costs of inaction. "Many of the things that we are debating, whether it's sustainability, whether it's structural reform, whether it's fighting inequalities," said Lagarde at event in May, all "will be meaningless if in twenty years time essentially we have wasted the small window of opportunity we have."

COMMENTS

More Related News

Ex-Tennessee Gov. Bredesen introduces renewable energy firm
Ex-Tennessee Gov. Bredesen introduces renewable energy firm

A new business venture by former Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen takes on global warming by helping companies fund solar panels in communities with dirty-power electric grids. The Democrat plans to introduce Clearloop on Tuesday at a conference headlined by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. It's Bredesen's first big public foray since losing a U.S. Senate bid last year.

Political Risk Is Alive in Latin America as Protests Spread
Political Risk Is Alive in Latin America as Protests Spread

(Bloomberg) -- Latin America, the traditional poster child for political risk in financial markets, is back as a source of concern for investors.Chilean President Sebastian Pinera on Saturday became the second leader this month to declare a state of emergency, his hand forced by violent protests in South

Fallout from Trump
Fallout from Trump's trade wars felt by economies around the world

The collateral damage of the United States' trade wars is being felt from the fjords of Iceland to the auto factories of Japan. Central bank governors and finance ministers traded grim tales of suffering economies at the International Monetary Fund and World Bank fall meetings in Washington this week. Some also noted how far U.S. policy had shifted from the 1940s, when Washington co-founded the IMF.

IMF chief says building
IMF chief says building 'peer pressure' to follow trade rules

With trade tensions undermining confidence and global growth, economic leaders are increasingly pushing each other to fix the shortcomings that fueled the disputes, IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva said Saturday. As the United States and China remain engulfed in a massive tariff battle and with Brexit turmoil continuing on Saturday, trade overshadowed the discussions of finance officials gathered for the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. "We need to look into what are the reasons we are not making more progress on trade and they are not just the relations between US and China," Georgieva told reporters.

How Guilty Should You Feel About Flying?
How Guilty Should You Feel About Flying?

The Swedes call it "flygskam," or "flying shame," the movement that encourages people to stop taking flights to lower their carbon footprints.But should most Americans really be ashamed of getting on a plane to see grandma this holiday season?The short answer: Probably not. If your flights are purely a luxury, though, that's another matter.A small group of frequent flyers, 12% of Americans who make more than six round trips by air a year, are responsible for two-thirds of all air travel and, by extension, two-thirds of aviation emissions, according to a new analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation, a nonprofit research group.Each of these...

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Latin America

facebook
Hit "Like"
Don't miss any important news
Thanks, you don't need to show me this anymore.