Home Climate Change This Is The Point Of A Carbon Tax After All

This Is The Point Of A Carbon Tax After All



There can be complaints about the idea of a carbon tax. You, dear gentle readers around here, tend to argue that the entire climate change idea is a nonsense – or stronger words to that effect.

Over on the other side there are the idiots complaining that this would make consumers pay for dealing with climate change. As here:

New environmental rules imposed by Brussels are set to make air travel more expensive, analysts have warned.

Tickets may rise by between 5pc to 8pc under carbon pricing rules proposed as part of the European Union’s “Fit for 55” scheme, UBS warned.

Jarrod Castle, an analyst at the bank, said airlines would face the highest bills across the transport sector if they were forced to offset their own emissions.

He warned that a new minimum tax on aviation fuel for flights within the EU would also push up costs for operators and “is likely to result in the industry trying to increase ticket prices”.

Well, yes, that’s the point.

We consumers are the people creating the emissions that lead to climate change. So, it’s our behaviour as consumers that needs to be changed – assuming the entire idea isn’t the bollocks that some claim it is.

Now, of course, this is the European Union, they’re going to get this wrong in the details. It’ll be the most appallingly wasteful implementation. But the very point of a carbon tax is to raise the cost of emissions to consumers.

If emissions are a bad thing then we desire fewer of them. Humans do less of more expensive things. Raise the price of emissions there will be fewer emissions.

OK, but how far should we raise the price in order to reduce emissions?

Our goal is to maximise human utility over time. What level of emissions gives us the most gorgeousness of life over the generations? That’s what the calculation of the social cost of carbon gives us. That’s the point and function of that calculation. So, the tax should be at that social cost of carbon – say, a tenner, maybe £20 on an intra-European flight – and we’re done.

Yes, there are some damages off in the future from the flight taken. There’s also some joy now from said flight. The carbon tax at the social cost of carbon balances these two items and leads to hte finest of all possible worlds.

That is, the whole point of a carbon tax is to raise ticket prices.



  1. 1. The consumer pays a tenner extra for the flight.
    2. The EU collects the tenner.
    3. The EU wastes the tenner on some project that the population does not want (otherwise they would have funded it themselves).
    4. How is anyone, including Greta and Al Gore, any better off?

  2. 3a. The green lobby gets the EU to spend the money on themselves, i.e. waste it.
    4a. Greta and Gore are both set to get a large portion of that money from the wastage through directorships, “charity” donations, etc.

    So Greta and Gore get their money (and presumably joy) now. The rest of us are just out the money.

  3. “Climate change” is quite simply the most extraordinarily damaging and grotesque scam in history.

    It exists solely in computer models and nowhere else. When the scam began, at least the scaremongers could do a simple graphic as to why more CO2 led to warming (grossly simplified of course, ignoring a huge number of other factors).

    Could somebody here explain why more CO2 causes more “extreme weather”, which is how the scam is currently being couched. I’d like to see somebody at least try? Let’s keep it simple. How was the rain last week in sausage land caused by “carbon”

    Any takers?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here


in British English
expunct (ɪkˈspʌŋkt)
VERB (transitive)
1. to delete or erase; blot out; obliterate
2. to wipe out or destroy

Support Us

Recent posts

American Hyperconsumerism Is Killing Fewer People!

This report does not say what the Guardian headline writers think it does: Three Americans create enough carbon emissions to kill one person, study finds The...

Contracts Often Lag New Revenue Streams

I've been - vaguely and not with any great interest - anticipating a story like this: Scarlett Johansson sues Walt Disney over Marvel’s Black Widow...

Richard Murphy Rediscovers Monetarism

We have a delightful example of how Richard Murphy simply doesn't understand the basic nuts and bolts of the economics he wants to impose...

Vox Is Missing The Point About Having A Constitution

Not that we should be all that surprised by this from the progressives at Vox. No government- well, no one not controlled by...

So Let’s Have An Elitist Technocracy Instead!

There's been a certain amount - OK, a lot - of squealing in the US about how democracy is the ultimate value and we...

Recent comments