A market-oriented answer to climate change

WHAT if there were a solution to climate change that did not require new regulations or growing the size of government? What if this solution would grow our economy and create more American jobs than continuing to burn fossil fuels and doing nothing about climate change?

It would make sense to implement such a solution even if climate change were not a problem. Fortunately, there is such a solution — carbon fee and dividend, as proposed by Citizens’ Climate Lobby.

Under carbon fee and dividend, carbon would be taxed and 100 percent of the net proceeds would be distributed monthly to all American citizens. There would be no growth in government, and consumers would be shielded from increasing fuel costs.

Carbon would be taxed where it enters our economy. Oil and natural gas would be taxed when they are pumped from the ground. Coal would be taxed when it is mined. To protect American manufacturers and incentivize our trading partners to reduce their carbon emissions, fees also would be imposed on goods imported from countries without a carbon fee, and carbon fees would be rebated to U.S. companies exporting goods to those countries.

Citizens’ Climate Lobby proposes an initial fee of $15 per ton of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere, rising each year by an additional $10 per ton. Each tax increase of $10 per ton of carbon dioxide would add about 9 cents to the price of a gallon of gasoline.

One-hundred percent of the net revenue would be distributed to American citizens through monthly dividend checks. American adults, age 18 and up, would receive a full share, and American children would receive a half-share, up to two children per family. A family of four would receive about $288 monthly after ten years and about $396 monthly after 20 years. The carbon dividend would equal or exceed increased fuel costs for two-thirds of American families, and most low-income families would come out ahead.

Carbon fee and dividend would create millions of new American jobs in two ways. First, most lowerand middle-income Americans would spend their dividend checks quickly, directly stimulating our economy and creating jobs. Second, the carbon fee would steer capital investment away from the capital-intensive oil, gas and coal industries to the more labor-intensive renewable-energy, construction and retail sectors. It takes more people to install rooftop solar panels and energy upgrades in old buildings than it does to pump oil or mine coal.

The carbon fee would incentivize American industry to pursue energy efficiency and fossil-fuel alternatives without being forced to do so by government regulations. Businesses would anticipate and respond to greatly increased consumer demand for energy-efficient homes and automobiles and for alternatives to fossil fuels. There would be nearly unlimited ways to make money while decarbonizing our economy, and America’s free-market entrepreneurs would respond as they always do, with enthusiasm and innovation.

Carbon fee and dividend is not a starry-eyed proposal. ExxonMobil, BP and Shell have endorsed and are lobbying for a carbon fee and dividend framework proposed by Republican luminaries Howard Baker III and George P. Schultz.

Carbon fee and dividend is a winwin-win solution to climate change. It would greatly reduce our greenhouse emissions and be a win for our environment and everyone who is concerned about it. It is a win for conservatives who oppose growing the government and increasing government regulation. It is a win for our economy and for American workers.

Carbon fee and dividend is the best response to climate change. The best time to implement carbon fee and dividend was yesterday. The next best time is today.

Jerry King, an earth scientist who has lived in the Las Vegas Valley since 1986, and Joanne Leovy, a family medicine physician who has practiced in Southern Nevada since 2001, are members of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby (www.climatelobby.org).

Tim Brinton