Climate Change >
Contacts >
Read Comments >
June Comments
Climate Comments
June 2008
Drive 55mph
Back in the 70's & 80's autos did not have overdrive transmissions so 55
mph saved fuel. Today most transmissions are overdrive transmissions which
will constantly be up and down shifting to maintain a 55 mph speed. This
will use more fuel.
--Ronald Jagisch
55 mph speed limit
I drive 60 mph on the freeway now to save money in a small truck that is
suppose to get 23 mpg on the freeway, I get 30 mpg. I think that if
the freeway speed limit were reduced nation wide we would reduce our fuel
consumption and lower the price at the pump. And an added benefit would be
lower emissions.
-- Rich Johnigk
Carbon credits and cap and trade policy
Greetings from Oregon,
I would like to offer a thought that I believe is key in understanding Global climate change and our response to it.
The context of our analysis is critical in our understanding this threat to human survival. If we believe that the environment is a 'subset' of our economy then everything that follows will fall painfully short toward meaningful analysis or finding real solutions.
We MUST understand that our economy is in fact a subset of our environment.
Once we understand this it becomes apparent that programs and analysis like carbon credits and cap and trade policies will NEVER solve anything. It is truly a bury ones head in the sand kind of response. It is time, perhaps
past time to take the conclusion of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment seriously, that 60% of our ecosystem function is now in decline.
If we have any 'family' values or if we are concerned at all about the future our children will inherent, it is time to take seriously how we are destroying the very life support systems that all our lives depend.
The Faustian and demonic assumptions that underline and beguile modern society and the Industrial paradigm include that we allow the marketplace to define 'value' while giving no value to intact ecosystems. Until we regulate and punish those behaviors that foul our nest and reward those which enhance it we will never make any progress toward turning the corner on climate change and hasten the demise of life as we know it.
Connect the dots.
-- Craig Patterson
Transit Funding
The CAT has noted the need for new funding mechanisms for transit. Below is a concept for a local option "vehicle carbon tax" to fund more local bus service, but it could also be used by Sound Transit, for example. I have equations, links, and other details if you want them.
Example: A tax rate of around 1 penny per pound of carbon would permit King County to double local bus service over the next decade, plus reduce the transit sales tax.
-- Dick Burkhart, Ph.D., Citizens Transit Campaign
Proposal for a Vehicle Carbon Tax
Need: There are no means of funding in place to meet anticipated growth in local bus ridership. King County, for example, is maxed out on its transit taxing authority, and its recent Transit Now Initiative will only increase bus service by 15% to 20% over the next decade. But the 7% increase in King County ridership during 2007 indicates that the demand for more service could easily double over the next decade. At the same time incentives are needed for people to shift from fossil fuel energy to renewable energy.
This increase is expected because gas prices will continue their dramatic escalation as world oil production, already stagnating, goes into permanent decline within a few years. In addition, the state climate targets for reducing driving will be mostly easily met by more frequent and reliable all day service to shift many common trips (¾ of miles driven), not just commute trips, to buses. The developing light rail system will become the backbone of such service, but it is many years away from regional build out, and it will need much better connecting bus service to realize its potential.
Traditional transportation related taxes, such as the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax, though they have considerable merit, have met with popular resistance in some areas. The sales tax is regressive and is already heavily used. Proposed tolling revenue will only provide help in a few corridors.
Due to both escalating Climate Change and the rapid depletion of fossil fuels, what is needed is a “green” tax with “equity”. That is, a tax that rewards all who reduce their green house gas emissions and which provides extra assistance to those most likely to need it.
Purpose: Funding to at least double local transit service over the next decade, plus diverse incentives for the reduction of carbon emissions
Authorization: Counties, or other local or regional governments, would be authorized to levy this tax with voter approval. It would be desirable to use this to replace currently used transit taxes, such as the sales tax and MVET, in addition to generating new revenue.
Concept: The tax would be based on annual carbon usage associated with a vehicle, including its manufacturing, maintenance, and driving. The carbon produced from driving is easily calculated from miles driven, kind of fuel, and miles per gallon. The carbon from manufacturing and maintenance, as depreciated over time, cannot be directly calculated at this time, but it can be estimated from the current value of the vehicle as translated into gallons of fuel.
The equity feature is that the county would establish a target level of carbon usage per vehicle, say half the current average, and provide carbon credits in proportion to usage below this level. The county would establish programs for redemption of these credits, such as for transit passes, energy conservation, or renewable energy. The credits would be paid for out of the tax revenue. Credits would be available to any registered voter of the county, even those who are not a registered owner of a vehicle, with credits being split the among registered owners of the same vehicle.
Revenue: The county would be authorized to use the tax revenue to support additional bus service of all kinds and the vehicles, technology, and infrastructure needed for this service. The county would be encouraged to provide and promote much more frequent all day service on many routes, using ridership models which incorporate different scenarios for escalating gas prices, income levels, and incentives for less driving.
Another authorized usage would be for pedestrian and cycling facilities. For individuals or small businesses, the county could offer incentives for electrification of vehicles or installation of renewable energy systems. It could also organize neighborhood carpool and delivery systems.
The county would set the carbon credit level within limits so as to maximize the overall reduction of carbon emissions. Suggested limits are that between 1/6 and 1/3 of the revenue collected would fund the carbon credit program.
