Isn’t There a Better Way? (No, There Isn’t)

G. Metcalf
{"title":"Isn’t There a Better Way? (No, There Isn’t)","authors":"G. Metcalf","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780190694197.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter reviews alternative approaches to putting a price on pollution to control greenhouse gas emissions. It reviews the history of the Clean Air Act and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and demonstrates that these policies cut pollution at a much higher cost than by simply putting a price on pollution. It also reviews subsidies for clean energy, state-level renewable portfolio standards, and information and voluntary programs and demonstrates that a carbon tax is superior to any of these alternatives.","PeriodicalId":275101,"journal":{"name":"Paying for Pollution","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paying for Pollution","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190694197.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter reviews alternative approaches to putting a price on pollution to control greenhouse gas emissions. It reviews the history of the Clean Air Act and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and demonstrates that these policies cut pollution at a much higher cost than by simply putting a price on pollution. It also reviews subsidies for clean energy, state-level renewable portfolio standards, and information and voluntary programs and demonstrates that a carbon tax is superior to any of these alternatives.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
难道没有更好的办法吗?(不,没有)
本章回顾了为污染定价以控制温室气体排放的各种方法。它回顾了《清洁空气法》和企业平均燃料经济性(CAFE)标准的历史,并证明这些政策以比简单地为污染定价高得多的代价来减少污染。报告还审查了清洁能源补贴、州级可再生能源组合标准、信息和自愿项目,并表明碳税优于上述任何一种替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What to Do with $200 Billion: Give It Back Why Do Economists Like a Carbon Tax? Enacting a Carbon Tax: How Do We Get There? Introduction: Why This Book? So You Want a Carbon Tax: How Do You Design It?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1