Guest “Just Say No” by David Middleton
A $240 PER GALLON GAS TAX TO FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING? NEW UN REPORT SUGGESTS CARBON PRICING
11:50 AM 10/08/2018
Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor
- A new U.N. report suggests a $240 per gallon gas tax equivalent is needed to fight global warming.
- The U.N. says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton in the year 2100.
- If you think that’s unlikely to ever happen, you’re probably right.
A United Nations special climate report suggests a tax on carbon dioxide emissions would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton at the end of the century to effectively limit global warming.
For Americans, that’s the same as a $240 per gallon tax on gasoline in the year 2100, should such a recommendation be adopted. In 2030, the report says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $5,500 — that’s equivalent to a $49 per gallon gas tax.
If you think that’s an unlikely scenario, you’re probably not wrong. However, it’s what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, released Sunday night, sees as a policy option for reducing emissions enough to keep projected warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.
In summary, new analyses are consistent with the AR5 and show that the price of carbon would need to increase significantly when a higher level of stringency is pursued (high confidence). Values vary substantially across models, scenarios and socio-economic, technology and policy assumptions. While the price of carbon is central to prompt mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5°C-consistent pathways, a complementary mix of stringent policies is required.
104 = 10,000
|Carbon tax per ton of CO2|
|Gasoline per gallon (retail)||$2.50||$0.22||$0.27||$240|
|Natural gas per mcf (residential)||$10.91||$1.33||$1.59||$1,434|
|Propane per gallon (residential)||$2.50||$0.14||$0.17||$152|
|Heating oil per gallon (residenial)||$3.07||$0.25||$0.30||$270|
|Kerosene per gallon (retail)||$3.29||$0.24||$0.29||$260|
|Coal per short ton (Powder River Basin)||$12.10||$52.52||$63.02||$56,720|
Just say NO! MAGA!