As the Clean Electricity Performance Program dies, many are pushing a carbon tax to replace it. Bad idea. A carbon tax would raise energy prices and make every US industry less competitive. The only rational approach to lowering emissions is liberating nuclear and natural gas.🧵
Any policy toward CO2 must recognize that CO2 emissions are a global issue--and that global emissions are rising because of the developing world's increasing use of fossil fuels. The US causes less than 1/6 of global emissions—and falling.
eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/d…
The developing world overwhelmingly uses fossil fuels because that is by far the lowest-cost way for them to get reliable energy. Unreliable solar and wind can’t come close. That’s why China and India have hundreds of new coal plants in the pipeline.
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…
The only way to lower CO2 emissions and benefit America is to promote innovation that makes lower-carbon energy truly reliable and low-cost. Are China and India going to stop using fossil fuels so long as they are the lowest-cost option? They won’t and they shouldn’t.
America can lower emissions and energy costs by decriminalizing nuclear energy. Nuclear is actually the safest source of energy and the only way to provide reliable non-carbon electricity anywhere in the world. Yet politicians are overregulating it to death.
America can also lower emissions and energy costs by lifting irrational restrictions on natural gas, such as anti-fracking policies and pipeline opposition. Yet many politicians want to restrict or outlaw fracking as well as stop new pipelines.
By liberating lower-carbon energy, America can lower emissions, lower costs, and encourage innovation. And yet instead of pursuing these energy liberation opportunities, many of our politicians seek to pursue energy taxation instead via a "carbon tax."
A carbon tax is a tax on CO2 emissions. Since all energy directly or indirectly emits CO2, a carbon tax would make all energy more expensive--adding the most costs to coal, oil, and natural gas (in that order).
Increasing energy costs is the ticket to economic failure. Since every industry uses energy, the higher cost American energy is the higher cost every American product and service is. A carbon tax means American industry is less competitive.
What happens to CO2 emissions when a carbon tax drives up American energy prices and shuts down American industry? Our CO2 emissions are "offshored" to nations without a carbon tax.
Some politicians say they can solve the problem of a carbon tax offshoring CO2 emissions--often called "leakage"--by setting up a massive bureaucracy that taxes the emissions involved in every import. This is impossible to do accurately and thus guarantees corruption.
Politicians say a carbon tax will do no harm because it would be "revenue neutral." But "revenue neutral" just means the government's finances are unaffected. Increasing energy costs for American industry will hurt every American's finances.
Australia’s short, painful carbon tax experience is instructive. One year into the Australian carbon tax, Australians saw their home electricity prices jump by 15%. By the time they repealed it the following year, the carbon tax was responsible for 19% of household energy costs.
Politicians say a carbon tax is good because it is more efficient than random coercive policies like opposing pipelines or passing renewable mandates. But in practice the politicians don't replace random coercive policies with a carbon tax, they just add the carbon tax on top.
Most advocates of a carbon tax see them as a first step to give government unlimited power to restrict energy use. They start by proposing a tax that costs us "just" 20 cents a gallon. Once they have that power of taxation they want to increase the tax dozens of times higher.
Most advocates of a "low" carbon tax when pressed say it should grow enormously -- because they think fossil fuels should be eliminated. Example: When I debated RFK Jr. he said gasoline should be at least $12/gallon.
Summary: A carbon tax would raise energy prices, make every American industry less competitive, and offshore our CO2 emissions to the countries that outcompete us. And it would create a dangerous and potentially unlimited new government power that could truly destroy our economy.
What should people concerned about CO2 emissions support instead of a carbon tax? Liberation and innovation. Liberate nuclear, natural gas, and other lower-carbon technologies so that innovation makes lower-carbon energy cheap for everyone.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexEpstein

18 Oct
COP 26, the largest "climate conference"--aka fossil fuel elimination conference--since the Paris Climate Accords, is starting to fall apart as countries seek *more* fossil fuel.

Let's make sure this genocidal conference totally falls apart. Here's the necessary ammunition.🧵
The alleged basis of UN Climate Conferences and their fossil fuel elimination commitments is the idea of "climate crisis." But this is a pseudoscientific idea based on a denial of our fossil fueled mastery of climate. Here's a full explanation:
energytalkingpoints.com/climate-crisis/
The alleged scientific credibility of the genocidal UN Climate Conference comes from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Here's how the IPCC is fundamentally distorted by anti-human religion.
Read 12 tweets
15 Oct
Great news: Joe Manchin is standing up to the Administration's insane insistence—during an energy crisis involving shortages of fossil fuels—on cutting emissions 40-50% by 2030. That means minimum 50% unreliable solar+wind. Manchin could literally save our country from ruin.
Here's why the centerpiece of this Administration's efforts to radically cut CO2 emissions, an 80% "Clean Energy Standard," is a disaster.
Here's the definitive refutation of the idea that the US can rapidly get to "80% clean electricity" because other countries have.
Read 4 tweets
14 Oct
Awesome: Latino landscaping company owner Miguel Rojas trashes California's supposedly Latino-friendly new ban on gasoline lawnmowers and leaf-blowers:
"This is just going to hurt us....Maybe the writers of this should mow a lawn a few times before judging what’s best for us."
👇
"It should really come down to preference. My crews prefer different things, sometimes based on the neighborhood. Some like gas, some like electric, some don’t care. But now they’re trying to get us not to use certain ones? That’s idiotic."
californiaglobe.com/articles/lands…
"And one of them is saying that this is for Latinos. This is just going to hurt us, as electric ones don’t last as long due to the battery life. And we wear masks and other protective equipment, so we’re fine using the gas ones." --Latino landscaping company owner Miguel Rojas
Read 5 tweets
13 Oct
Introducing the ultimate source of intellectual ammunition for pro-human, pro-freedom people on energy, environmental, and climate issues: the (free) Energy Talking Points @substack newsletter.

alexepstein.substack.com

Please share this far and wide.

Previews 👇
My talking points on the "other countries have 80% clean electricity" argument for reconciliation.
alexepstein.substack.com/p/talking-poin…
My talking points on the recent California spill.
alexepstein.substack.com/p/talking-poin…
Read 6 tweets
13 Oct
Skyrocketing natural gas and coal prices are not a failure of the fossil fuel industry, but the total failure of *anti-fossil fuel policies*, which falsely promised that if we dramatically restricted fossil fuel energy production, green energy could easily replace it.

THREAD
There is no physical reason that the natural gas and coal industries can't meet rising demand. The world has hundreds of years' worth of gas deposits and thousands of years worth of coal deposits. But governments radically restrict the freedom to utilize those deposits.
There is no technical or economic reason the natural gas and coal industries can't meet demand. These industries have gotten radically more capable and efficient in the last two decades--especially natural gas with fracking. But governments radically restrict their freedom.
Read 12 tweets
12 Oct
Good news! Huntington Beach, the CA beach most affected by the oil spill, is now open "after water quality tests revealed no detectable levels of oil-associated toxins."

Thanks to long-time Californians @benshapiro and @SteveHiltonx for helping me spread the truth last week.
👇
During the height of the oil spill hysteria last week, I discussed with @benshapiro how oil is a natural, organic substance that would quickly become non-harmful to beachgoers--which is exactly what happened. Did any mainstream media get this right?
During the height of oil spill hysteria last week I had an extended discussion with @SteveHiltonx, now vindicated, about the manageable nature of the spill vs. the completely unmanageable burden that anti-oil policies place on Californians.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(