Search results

My guess would be this HE. A price on carbon enchourages developed nations to reverse the need for population growth as a driver of economic growth. If we do a good enough job of it we will finally learn how to survive/prosper without population growth. Extrapolating that further tells me that a...

Hi Dazz, I'm afraid I'm on the other side of that arguement. To me it's a matter of accounting. Our old economic model doesn't account for the true cost of productivity. It assumes the planet's resources are infinite and that growing the population to create economic growth would be without...

HE that makes plenty sense to me. I'm sure either system could be managed in that way, but a tax might be easier to sell. What doesn't make sense to me though is the idea of the governmant simply taking resposibility and telling individual companies what their carbon limits are.

Sure, well carbon credits are currently about $18 a tonne and no countries currently have carbon trading. How high the price goes all depends on how tight the cap is, but current estimates I believe are that a cap & trade system with a cap tight enough to achieve Australias target of 5%...

OO, if this is true then adding an ETS into that mix will likely make the cost of wind farming lower than current coal fired electricity. The difference to be paid for by low carbon efficiency businesses whi will have to buy credits to emit, at competitive market prices.

Worldwide economic security is becoming more closely aligned with environmental issues whether we like it or not. In the current model, economic growth is reliant on population growth. If we want low population growth and a strong economy for the industrialised world then we should support a...

The sooner we put a price on carbon, the sooner the real costs of things will be be known. For example the real cost of international trade, of letting our manufacturing industry go, of importing our food, and of growing the population.