In an op-ed in the Washington Post George P. Shultz proposes an interesting strategy:
Adopting a carbon dividend approach would pay huge dividends for the global climate, the U.S. economy and U.S. leadership in the world.
Our carbon dividend strategy has four interrelated elements that account for its strength: a gradually rising and revenue-neutral carbon tax; carbon dividend payments made equally to all Americans, to be funded using all the carbon-tax revenue; rollback of costly command-and-control regulations that were implemented because the environmental costs of carbon fuels have not been incorporated into their price; and border adjustment to ensure a level playing field and U.S. competitiveness.
From my point of view it’s just missing one thing: progressivity. The “carbon dividends” paid to those with the lowest incomes should be highest, decreasing until no dividends at all are paid to the highest income earners. If my calculations are correct and carbon emissions increase geometrically with income that’s the only way to produce presumably desired effect.
Reasonable notion, but I doubt if it’d be politically possible unless paupers and millionaires got proportional dividends from the carbon tax. You want to claw back something from the well to do … we have a progressive income tax to handle that.
Off-topic, but related:
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/06/climate-change-housing-berkeley/
Upscale “do-as-I-sayism.”
It is late, but I ran across this.
Fisticuffs Over the Route to a Clean-Energy Future
If you stop the wobble in the Earth’s axis, Anthropological Global Warming is solved. Maybe, we could get the Chinese and Indians to all jump at the same time.