There are three big problems with the concept: It would disproportionately hurt low-income consumers, it would inevitably be watered down by special interests, and it would have to be imposed on our trading partners.
Mark Mathis: 'The idea of a tax on carbon is that it will cause people to use smaller amounts of oil, natural gas, and coal while driving innovation in the energy sector. But there’s a big problem with this kind of blindered thinking. Energy is not like any other commodity. It is the foundational component of all commodities and our options are extremely limited...'
'On the electricity side, the grid requires a constant flow of electrons. Sixty-three percent of this power comes from fossil fuels, 20 percent from nuclear, and about seven percent from hydroelectric. That’s 90 percent! Wind and solar combined provide only 7.6 percent, but even this small number is deceptive. Wind and solar are intermittent, so they require baseload sources (mostly natural gas) to keep the electricity flowing when they aren’t performing...
'Then there’s mining, which is also heavily dependent on oil, natural gas, and coal. In order to significantly ramp up wind and solar energy we correspondingly have to accelerate mining. The key ingredients in renewable energy technologies are rare earth minerals. It takes a large amount of fossil fuel to extract them...'
'Fossil fuels are deeply embedded in every aspect of the modern world. Trying to get people to use less of them by making everything more expensive and then giving people money back through an inefficient government-controlled program is a flawed premise from start to finish.'
In a recent appearance on Fox News Channel, Marc Morano, the creator of climatedepot.org, said of the New Green Deal: “We’re going to treat now carbon dioxide a trace essential gas — humans inhale oxygen and we exhale CO2 — as somehow akin to the Nazi party and World War II initiative, which is what they are claiming. The Democrats and climate activists want a mobilization like World War II.”