<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:tahoma, new york, times, serif;font-size:10pt"><div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Paul,</SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">People cannot afford the price of gas now, how could the price be raised without damaging society's most <SPAN style="RIGHT: auto" id=misspell-0><SPAN>vulnerable</SPAN></SPAN>?</SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">I think nuclear power plants take too long to build and people panic no matter where it is put. </SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">We don't need to reinvent the wheel here. All we need to do is stop making the machines that are destroying the Earth, and build the ones that don't. For example, why are we building automobiles that get only 10 miles to the gallon, when we know how to build automobiles that get 100 miles to the gallon? The solution is simple, STOP building the vehicles that get 10 miles to the gallon, and only build the ones that get 100 miles to the gallon. </SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Is it really that hard to figure out the best method of preventing machines from destroying the Earth is to not build them, rather than building them and telling people to use them not as often?</SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Donovan J. Arnold</SPAN></div>
<div><BR></div>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto" dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px" class=hr contentEditable=false readonly="true"></DIV><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Paul Rumelhart <godshatter@yahoo.com><VAR id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Ted Moffett <starbliss@gmail.com> <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B> Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020@moscow.com> <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Monday, June 4, 2012 7:42 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Vision2020] carbon tax<BR></FONT></DIV><BR>
<DIV id=yiv878170852>
<DIV><BR>When I suggest a carbon tax, I plead with people to go easy on it at first. It's insurance because of the uncertainty in the <SPAN id=misspell-2 class=mark>feedbacks</SPAN> of climate change - we're not yet at the "pack a backpack and start hiking north" stage quite yet. If the carbon tax is relatively small, it will mean a relatively small increase in the price of gas and of electricity from coal-fired plants. Too much of an increase, and we have people unable to afford gas to get to work so they can afford the increase in their utilities.<BR><BR>Start small, but reassess every few years. Reassess both the science and the uncertainty. If there is still a lot of uncertainty, increase it a bit. It's a hedge against the possibility of the <SPAN id=misspell-3 class=mark>IPCC's</SPAN> worst scenario, not a Solution to the Problem. <BR><BR>Frankly, shutting off all coal-fired plants and ceasing the use of oil
will still leave us with decades of carbon in the atmosphere that has to come out. We also have China and India and the rest of the up-and-coming nations. Why do I want the tax, then? Because there are lots of sensible reasons to get off of oil and coal. Pollution, political conflict, mining accidents, etc.<BR><BR>What we really need is nuclear ramped up. <SPAN id=misspell-4 class=mark>Fukushima</SPAN> was a worst-case scenario.<BR><BR>Paul<BR><BR>On 06/04/2012 03:10 PM, Ted Moffett wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>A carbon tax with tax shifting or other compensation, or a fee and dividend system, would offer relief to consumers of low and middle incomes for the increases in the cost of goods and services. In fact, some economic projections show low and middle income consumers coming out ahead financially, with a carbon tax and tax shifting or other compensation, or fee and dividend systems, to promote a quicker transition away from fossil fuels. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This of course would depend on their economic choices. If someone used a lot of coal fired electricity and drove a gas guzzler 100 miles a day to commute, they would see a large increase in the cost of coal and oil energy associated with their lifestyle. But for those who make choices to avoid intensive fossil fuel associated economic decisions, the reduction in their taxes or other compensation or the dividend payments they would receive, could offer the chance to economically benefit from the tax or fee on carbon.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Incredible that in this thread, Australia's plan, just now being implemented, though in the works for a long time, to tax carbon and compensate families for the increases in costs, was not mentioned once... </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Below are sources of information on carbon tax and tax shifting or other compensation, and fee and dividend systems. <A href="http://cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>Cleanenergyfuture.gov.au</A> source below claims compensation of 120 percent of the expected increases in costs from the carbon tax:</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Lowering Income Taxes While Raising Pollution Taxes Reaps Great Returns </DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Lester R. Brown<BR>http://www.earth-policy.org/book_bytes/2010/pb4ch10_ss2</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>-------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>
<DIV class=yiv878170852bookTitle><A href="http://www.earth-policy.org/books/pb3" rel=nofollow target=_blank>Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization</A></DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852bookAuthor>Lester R. Brown</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852bookAuthor><FONT>Chapter 13. The Great Mobilization: Shifting Taxes and Subsidies</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>http://www.earth-policy.org/books/pb3/PB3ch13_ss2</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Info on Australia's "Clean Energy Future" plan with a carbon tax:</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/helping-households/who-will-get-assistance/</DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Over 4 million households get assistance worth 120 per cent of their expected average price impact</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>-----------------------------</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Info below on a fee and dividend system presented to the US Congress:</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Carbon Tax and 100% Dividend vs. Tax and Trade</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Testimony of James E. Hansen<BR>Committee on Ways and Means</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>US House of Representatives</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/2009/WaysAndMeans_20090225.pdf</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor> </DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>"...Tax and 100% Dividend--tax carbon emissions, but give all of the money back to the public..."</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor> </DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>NASA climate scientist James Hansen, quoted above, has opposed the cap and trade system that the Obama administration was trying to pass the US Congress, that failed:</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Cap and Fade</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>By JAMES HANSEN</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Published: December 6, 2009</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor> </DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor><A href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/opinion/07hansen.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/opinion/07hansen.html</A></DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor> </DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor><A href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/opinion/07hansen.html" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/opinion/07hansen.html</A></DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>---------------------------------------</DIV>
<DIV class=yiv878170852planBAuthor>Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett</DIV><BR>
<FIELDSET class=yiv878170852mimeAttachmentHeader></FIELDSET> <BR><PRE>=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-7 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.
<A class=yiv878170852moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.fsr.net/" rel=nofollow target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A>
<A class=yiv878170852moz-txt-link-freetext href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" rel=nofollow target=_blank ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A>
=======================================================</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV></DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-8 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR> <SPAN id=misspell-9 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></div></body></html>