Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government Earth United States

Can Washington State Finally Put a Price On Carbon? (wired.com) 147

Posted by BeauHD from the taxes-and-fees dept.
jwhyche writes: Beth Brunton walks around Seattle with a magenta umbrella. At 75 degrees and there not being a cloud in the sky, it gets peoples attention. What she is attempting to do is get people to sign a petition supporting Initiative 1631, known as the "Protect Washington Act." If this was to pass, Washington state would become the first state to adopt anything like a carbon tax. "The initiative proposes a 'fee on pollution' that would put a $15 charge on each metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted in Washington starting in 2020," reports Wired. "That charge would rise by $2 plus inflation every year until the state meets its climate goals, which include cutting its carbon footprint 36 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. The revenue raised would go toward investing in clean energy; protecting the air, water, and forests; and helping vulnerable communities prepare for wildfires and sea-level rise."

The report mentions Washington's previous attempt at a "carbon tax" initiative, which was ultimately rejected. It would have initially charged businesses $25 per metric ton of emissions before ramping up over time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Can Washington State Finally Put a Price On Carbon? More

Can Washington State Finally Put a Price On Carbon?

Comments Filter:

  • The solution to pollution? A tax (Score:3)

    by mschuyler ( 197441 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @09:10PM (#56753682) Homepage Journal

    Of course. If Seattle gets to choose, it will pass for sure. If the rest of the state gets a vote, maybe it won't. Seattle has never meant a tax it didn't like.

    • It was 48 degrees this morning here in Seattle, so what global warming?

    • You do know that taxing pollution as a solution is a Republican stance, and limiting the levels via regulations it is a Democratic one, right?

  • Fake news! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The article summary mentions no clouds in the sky.... but it describes events taking place in the Pacific Northwest, where such days just do not exist.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dryeo ( 100693 )

      May set records for dryness (something like 1.2 mm at VCR) and most days over the average high temps. June seems back to normal.

  • Washington State, paying guilt tax for China (Score:3, Informative)

    by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @09:25PM (#56753744) Journal

    Just what this state needs is more taxes, the new electric license plates cost 300 dollars and a monthly fee, sugar tax that includes soda water and diet soda but leaves the starbucks sugar sweet ass drinks sugar tax free...

    The pot tax is one of the highest, the alcohol tax is crazy high, the gas tax is stupidly high, and when we get tabs affordable, switch to pay per mile and tax on car value.

    Sorry, I don't know how much longer I can stay in this state, we have numerous bills to take our guns after they already gutted us to one of the harshed guns laws in the country. And Seattle is the fastest growing city in the USA, Yeah, read /r/seattle and see people complaining about 3k a month rents and light rail that wont be finished until I retire. (Kinda late). What does that 5k a year in property tax get you? Eating your retirement?

    Stupidity...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by BrookHarty ( 9119 )

      Sigh, reading the bill.
      https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets... [wa.gov]

      Protect Washington Act - Relating to reducing pollution by investing in clean air,
      clean energy, clean water, healthy forests, and healthy communities
      by imposing a fee on large emitters based on their pollution;

      Its really, the CLEAN out your wallet act.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        Sure is. Just like the one here in Ontario, and the one in California. It hurts everyone, and causes the most harm to the poorest people. It also helps kill economies. Ontario wasn't doing shit hot before the carbon tax(0.3% gdp/quarter) with? The 2018 numbers show that if it's not flat 0.0 gdp, it'll be negative and lining up for at least a technical recession.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Ichijo ( 607641 )

          Do you know what hurts poor people and economies even more than a carbon tax? A sales tax. If Washington used the carbon tax to offset and eliminate the sales tax, it would be a net win all around. Will they do it? Probably not. But it's a nice thought.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Mashiki ( 184564 )

            Do you know what hurts poor people and economies even more than a carbon tax? A sales tax. If Washington used the carbon tax to offset and eliminate the sales tax, it would be a net win all around. Will they do it? Probably not. But it's a nice thought.

            Will never happen. Just like it didn't happen in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, or Quebec. It's taxes on taxes on taxes. Which is why the Liberal Party and NDP are getting slaughtered up here in Canada. The Liberal Party of Ontario no longer exists as an official party after last night. The Liberal Party in Quebec is looking at the same option. The NDP coalition in BC is likely going to collapse since people are now chomping to push to recall members of the MLA and demand new elections. The NDP i

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          Yet BC has mostly had the best economy in Canada while having a carbon tax. Originally revenue neutral with rebates for the lowest income brackets it wasn't too bad though exempting the natural gas industry was kind of weird but both the left and the right (Provincially, not Vancouver) love natural gas, which is way better bet then diluted bitumen.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dcw3 ( 649211 )

            Yet BC has mostly had the best economy in Canada while having a carbon tax.

            Um, google "what's driving British Columbia's economy", and every article points to the real estate boom. Correlation != causation, but you knew that, right?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Mashiki ( 184564 )

            As someone else mentioned, that "best economy" was fully driven by real estate prices. 20-25% no less. This is followed up by "construction" aka new houses/apt buildings/condos and so on at 9%. So call it 32% give or take a few points being driven by two sectors. But why don't you tell people how gas at $1.58/L($6/gal). Usful tip, those rebates didn't help at all. They also didn't help the people in Alberta, and those people are chomping at the bit to remove the NDP from power so hard that it looks li

      • The file name of the proposed bill is: finaltext_1482.pdf. The title is "Initiative Measure No. 1631". The bill is in a typewriter font.

        Whoever is involved with that does not seem competent.

        A quote from the bill: "(a) A minimum of thirty-five percent of total investments authorized under this chapter must provide direct and meaningful benefits to pollution and health action areas."

        To me, that sentence seems written by an incompetent person, because it is an easy requirement to manipulate.
    • I'm a Seattle resident. One of the few blue collar workers left here. It was a great place to be in the 80's and 90's. Politicians have gotten money drunk and in many parts of the country, I'd be considered a liberal. Now large scale employers like Vigor shipyards and Boeing, not to mention low margin companies like Dick's burgers that cut their overhead to pay a decent wage and give employees health benefits are now being hit with this extra head tax. On top of it, they want to use the money to pay fo

    • You don't have an income tax. The state needs to get money somehow. And taxing per-mile is a usage fee.

    • The pot tax is one of the highest, the alcohol tax is crazy high, the gas tax is stupidly high, and when we get tabs affordable, switch to pay per mile and tax on car value.

      It's almost like the taxes are levied specifically to get you to change certain practices.

      Sorry, I don't know how much longer I can stay in this state

      Then go smoke pot, and drown yourself in alcohol in another state. But please don't keep buying petrol, the environment is fucked enough as it is.

    • [...]

      Sorry, I don't know how much longer I can stay in this state, we have numerous bills to take our guns after they already gutted us to one of the harshed guns laws in the country.

      [...]

      Stupidity...

      Stupidity is having lots of guns in the community, especially when it is so violent like the USA!

      Compare the USA with Switzerland for percentage of guns.

      Stupidity is electing a president that insists Global Warming isn't real.

      Stupidity is insisting Evolution isn't real because it conflicts with your brand of superstition.

      In general, stupidity is ignoring Reality (based on evidence & logic) in favour of Dogma.

  • Exactly how long does it take to make a ton of CO2 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tlambert ( 566799 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @09:26PM (#56753746)

    Exactly how long does it take to make a ton of CO2 for an exhaling human being?

    A human exhales about 2.3 pounds of carbon dioxide per day if they are sedentary, and up to 18.4 pounds if they are very active.

    So on average, unless you are an athlete, every 2 years, you exhale a ton of CO2.

    It will be fun to see them tax that... $7.50 a year from homeless people, or they are required to quit breathing.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by dryeo ( 100693 )

      Breathing is carbon neutral. While I pay a carbon tax on the gasoline I burn, I don't pay a carbon tax on the firewood I burn for heat., nor for the store bought charcoal I use for barbecuing.

      • Breathing is carbon neutral. While I pay a carbon tax on the gasoline I burn, I don't pay a carbon tax on the firewood I burn for heat., nor for the store bought charcoal I use for barbecuing.

        Actually it's not. But depending on your food source the entire lifecycle may be carbon neutral. Breathing generates CO2 by inhaling O2, and your body then reacts O2 with glucose generating CO2 as a result, it doesn't just strip the other gasses out of the air. This is actually why if you hold your breath you feel the need to breath > buildup of CO2 in your blood (your body doesn't think it needs oxygen, it thinks it needs to expel CO2). We breath in 400ppm and breath out several percent CO2, the same pe

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          Well it is all relative, the firewood involves me running a chainsaw and perhaps burning a gallon of gasoline and if I cheap out, a litre of chain oil (there is vegetable based chain oils). And a few gallons of gas to move it sometimes.
          Food is likewise dependent on sequestered carbon to one degree or another, tractors, delivery, perhaps fertilizer and so on.

      • By that measure, so is burning gasoline. Carbon isn't created or destroyed, it's merely attached/detached from various other elements.

        • By that measure, so is burning gasoline. Carbon isn't created or destroyed, it's merely attached/detached from various other elements.

          No it's not. The definition of being carbon neutral is cycling through the atmosphere. Gasoline is digging up sequestered carbon. That wouldn't otherwise cycle back in through the atmosphere. Breathing on the other hand puts CO2 in the atmosphere which gets taken out through the plants we eat.

      • The basis of the theory is that CO2 created by breathing, eating, etc, is "normal"....it's part of the standard cycle of carbon. Carbon introduced into the environment from sources like oil and coal skew the "normal" cycle because it hasn't been on the planet and part of the cycle for millions of years.

        With that in mind then they would theoretically charge you tax on the gasoline ("new carbon") but not on firewood ("existing carbon").

        Not that I think it's remotely a good idea anyway, but at least tha

      • Carbon Neutral isn't enough.

        You should sequester the carbon internally instead of exhaling it, by converting your bones to diamond.

        Sweden had a similar absurd claim about stopping all greenhouse gas emissions by 2025. Which would, of course, have included farting humans, cows, and reindeer.

        So I made up Swedish flag T-shirts that had printed across the yellow horizontal bar "Do Your Part: Don't Fart".

    • So on average, unless you are an athlete, every 2 years, you exhale a ton of CO2.

      Which also means on average you consume a ton of CO2 sequested by whatever it is you ate. Now if only the production of what you ate didn't involve belching carbon to the air you would be CO2 neutral. But it's easier to get companies to stop wasting energy during food production than it is to get people to stop breathing.

      It will be fun to see them tax that...

      Taxes are a handle on the economy to enact policy. Did you elect a politician that promised they will stop people from breathing? More likely you enacted a mouthbreather.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

      Bill Nye the not to be confused with science guy is advocating a tax on cows. https://www.washingtontimes.co... [washingtontimes.com] . Can't make this stuff up. They will try to tax us for exhaling if we let them.

      Side from the fact a "consensus" is not science and everyone knows it. Yet people keep believing in the lie.

  • It's introduction of the metric system by the back door. The use of metric units will not stand. Instead of $15 per tonne they should charge a proper rate: €14 per long ton.

    • It's introduction of the metric system by the back door. The use of metric units will not stand. Instead of $15 per tonne they should charge a proper rate: €14 per long ton.

      Metric units are a lot easier to use than the old Imperial Units that I was taught at school.

      What is the ratio of 6 lb 5 oz to 8 st 7 lb? In Kg it is a lot easier.

  • And pretty much all political proposals to penalize "bad" behavior is that they're not designed to respond to feedback. If you're going to do this, the correct way to do it is to designate some desired level of atmospheric carbon. The higher we go above that level, the greater the tax per ton of CO2 becomes. Likewise, the closer the actual CO2 level gets to the desired level, the smaller the tax becomes. (Conceivably it could go negative if it's deemed that too little atmospheric CO2 is also a danger.)
  • when the government taxes something because they will use the money to fix things. The reality is most of the money will be diverted right in to the politicians, bureaucrats and rich elites pockets. The corrupt politicians, bureaucrats and elites are incompetent at fixing most problems they create, but they are great thieves, what a joke on the people.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by SirSlud ( 67381 )

      The reality is most of the money will be diverted right in to the politicians

      This is so stupid a sentiment, it hurts.

    • I have this feeling as well...a European high taxes high services government sounds appealing but the idea that fellow Americans would be able to administer such a system is ridiculous.

  • Unintended Cosequences (Score:5, Informative)

    by amiga3D ( 567632 ) on Saturday June 09, 2018 @07:38AM (#56754844)

    Taxes have all kinds of repercussions to them. I remember the "luxury" tax on Yachts back in the 80s. "Rich people can afford to pay outrageous taxes on their expensive toys" they said. Yes, they can, but they didn't get rich by being stupid. They bought Yachts overseas and over 600,000 Americans lost their jobs. An entire industry was eradicated. It shouldn't take a genius to figure out that industries that could pay this tax wont if they can find a way to avoid it. Ultimately ALL taxes are paid by the working people. Either directly or indirectly.

    • Won't someone think of the coal miners!

    • Interesting, as I recall John Kerry big tax everything democrat and past presidential candidate who lived in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Taxachusetts) keeps his new yacht in a different state to avoid the taxes.
      John Kerry Saves $500,000 [huffingtonpost.com]

      Just my 2 cents ;)

    • Ultimately ALL taxes are paid by the working people. Either directly or indirectly.

      Ultimately all the costs of adapting to a warmer planet will be paid by the working people, either directly or indirectly. The goal of good government should be to minimize that total cost by figuring out how much to pay now in order to reduce the future cost. Carbon taxes are the most market-friendly way to internalize this particular externality. Though they really need to be applied globally and we have no mechanism to do that. Still, if everyone refuses to do it because others might not, no one will an

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by amiga3D ( 567632 )

        I honestly see no solution to the global warming problem except a world dictatorship. It would require universal effort. Given that the attempt at that would see possibly billions dead I think we'd better just get ready to deal with higher sea levels and temperatures. Technology is moving in the right direction, it's just not fast enough to avoid serious warming. Eventually though I feel the level of carbon usage will drop significantly. But that's at least 3 to 5 decades away.

  • Oregon.

    Idaho.

    Perhaps Canada?

    It'll be interesting to see how many plants in Washington are shut down to be replaced by plants just across the State Line....

    Yeah, they're not going to do that sort of thing automagically, but they won't be putting any new plants in Washington, and as older plants need to be replaced, they'll be replaced in Oregon and Idaho to avoid that extra cost of doing business....

    Oh, and is Washington one of those places that's terrified of nuclear power? Just curious....

  • "$15 charge on each metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted"

    I own a farm and forest land. My forests and fields absorb about 1,400 tons of carbon dioxide a year from the air as well as cleaning the air of dust, filtering the water (I'm at the top of the water shed) and other benefits to society.

    If they are going to charge $15/ton to emit carbon dioxide then then they should be sending me a check for $21,000 for my services of removing said carbon dioxide. Fair is fair.

    • "$15 charge on each metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted"

      I own a farm and forest land. My forests and fields absorb about 1,400 tons of carbon dioxide a year from the air as well as cleaning the air of dust, filtering the water (I'm at the top of the water shed) and other benefits to society.

      If they are going to charge $15/ton to emit carbon dioxide then then they should be sending me a check for $21,000 for my services of removing said carbon dioxide. Fair is fair.

      I agree with you, giving a Carbon Rebate to people to remove CO2 and other carbon gasses from the atmosphere is a good idea, as well as being fair. As it will encourage more people to do so.

      SpaceX and other companies (like Blue Origin) will start using lots of methane as rocket fuel. Making methane from water and atmospheric CO2, is way better than burning petroleum, as it is far more carbon neutral. We could end with methane replacing natural gas, oil, and coal, for all heavy transport where electricity

  • A carbon tax (a Pigovian tax [wikipedia.org]) is the method preferred by most economists.

    Keeping the tax to pick the winners is a sure fire way to create the political will to block it.

    Citizens' Climate Lobby (Carbon fee and dividend [citizensclimatelobby.org]) and others (Climate Leadership Council [clcouncil.org]) propose a revenue-neutral carbon tax and dividend similar to the Alaska Permanent Fund - but such that the tax collected is fully refunded. This makes the tax progressive, revenue neutral and politically sustainable.

    Australia's carbon tax scheme [wikipedia.org] i

Slashdot Top Deals

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Close