Carbon tax far better than business as usual

The comments by Gerald Holland in his March 22 letter on climate change and a carbon tax do not consider the virtually unanimous consensus of the scientific community that climate change exists and is man-made. Whether or not you consider carbon dioxide a pollutant, there is no doubt that it is a greenhouse gas that serves to warm the planet. The correlation between carbon dioxide levels and increased temperature of the earth is irrefutable.

Mr. Holland is concerned with the difficulty of imposing a carbon tax. Some of this may be valid, but the consequences of business as usual are far more alarming. This is no longer strictly a partisan issue. George Shultz and Howard Baker are among Republicans who have recommended a carbon tax, and they are hardly out of the mainstream. Rex Tillerson and Darren Woods, previous and current CEOs of Exxon Mobile, have also endorsed a carbon tax, and they could not remotely be seen as liberal. Darren Woods has stated a revenue-neutral carbon tax “would promote greater energy efficiency and the use of today’s lower-carbon options, avoid further burdening the economy, and also provide incentives for markets to develop additional low-carbon energy solutions for the future.” Well said.

A carbon tax is not a new concept, and certainly can be implemented. Making the tax revenue neutral by returning the funds collected as a dividend or tax reduction will mitigate economic impact, and is common where a tax is imposed. British Columbia and Sweden have successful carbon tax programs, and many other locations have either implemented a carbon tax or are in process of doing so. The United States should be a leader, not a follower, in the fight to save the environment.

The cost of business as usual far outweighs any possible negative effects of a carbon tax. For example, the cost due to sea level rise alone is astronomical. Sea level has risen about eight inches since 1870, and is rising at increasing rates, due to melting ice and thermal expansion. This may not sound like much, but Miami Beach has already initiated a $400 million program to install pumps and raise road levels to combat salt water incursion. Island nations and coastal cities are already under siege. Various sea level rise predictions for the year 2100 vary, but are in the range of two to eight feet. Consider the impact on coastal cities around the world even at the lowest projections. Costs to fight this could amount to trillions of dollars.

A quote attributed to Harvey Ruvin, chairman of the Miami-Dade Sea Level Rise Task Force: “The cost of inaction is the greatest cost.” ROBERT BROWN Bella Vista