The Lincoln Plan

For the last several years Ecological Internet has proposed a small U.S. government federal charge of $5 per ton of carbon emitted as CO2, which for gasoline is about 1 cent per gallon. Since Lincoln's portrait appears on both the penny and the $5 bill, the plan goes under his name - the "Lincoln Plan". A fundamental question in addressing climate change is whether cap-and-trade or a carbon tax would be more cost-effective. For a discussion of this matter, please see the following articles: Limiting Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Prices Versus Caps and After Kyoto: Alternative Mechanisms to Control Global Warming.

$5/ton is a very good starting point for a carbon charge - it would allow implementation mechanisms to be developed, and is modest enought to be politically achievable. Most of the revenue from the tax would be used to pay for measures to reduce CO2 emissions such as conserving forests, increasing energy efficiency, and adopting cleaner energy supplies.

At a later date the size of the charge can be adjusted as needed. Extra revenue from a charge over $5/ton would be used mostly to lower other taxes - particulary taxing energy and other natural resources rather then employment. In a few years, the carbon charge could well be about $37 per ton, or $10 per ton of CO2. This is around $5 per barrel of oil, and 1 cent per kWh of electrictiy from traditional coal-fired plants. A charge of this amount would appear to be reasonable. And it would give a large boost to new technologies. An additional $10/tCO2, covering just new power plants, might also be helpful.

Further boosting the plan's attractiveness would be its considerable side benefits. Saving forests, particularly tropical forests (3), would help safeguard the majority of Earth's species; efficiency gains could save us a lot of money; it would reduce dependence upon overseas sources of energy; and moving to cleaner energy supplies would reduce harmful pollutants of many kinds (4). Indeed, these ancillary benefits are so large that the plan would be worth trying even apart from its core benefit of climate protection.

In short, the Lincoln Plan could handle a serious problem with great effectiveness and at low, even negative, cost. Those who would like to contact a legislator or write a letter to the editor in support of the plan may forward this page or quote from it as they wish.

Notes

1. IPCC, 8-14. Summary for Policymakers, Question 3: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/vol4/english/009.htm

2. Repetto, 2, 35-7. Summary: http://powerpoints.wri.org/climate_ccp/sld001.htm

3. Totten, 17, 23. Forest Trends

4. Lovins, 26. Download Climate: Making Sense...: Rocky Mountain Institute

References

IPCC 2001: Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Lovins, A.B. & L.H. 1998: Climate: Making Sense and Making Money, 2nd ed., Rocky Mountain Institute, Snowmass, CO.

Repetto, R. & Austin, D. 1997: The Costs of Climate Protection: A Guide for the Perplexed, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.

Totten, M. 1999: Getting It Right: Emerging Markets for Storing Carbon in Forests, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.

posted to Climateark.org