The problem is that the Paris accords outline a goal, but they do not outline a plan.
I'm with Cincy on this...
- What concrete changes do we need to make to meet our Paris accord targets? This is a question about available technologies and deployment. Wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, etc?
- How much will it cost to do so?
- Is anyone in power (Congress, etc) actually enacting legislation in order to make those plans a reality?
Talking about how much "measurable" change to climate the Paris targets will effect is pointless unless we actually identify HOW we can achieve those targets and then actually do it.
I don't trust that nearly any country is making the changes now to hit those targets.
Signing a treaty isn't a plan. Defining a goal isn't a plan.
In this case I've described at least one part of a plan in this thread: a carbon tax. I want it revenue-neutral and offsetting some other tax we have. Preferably offsetting an existing regressive tax because a carbon tax will have certain level of regressivity to it. I threw out the idea of eliminating the payroll tax, but realized that we can't eliminate the entire payroll tax unless we price the carbon tax at exorbitant rates. So maybe if we
reduce other tax rates rather than eliminate to make it fully offsetting, that will work better.
But at least if we increase the price of carbon, it makes every alternative technology by default more cost-competitive. In addition, it gives individual Americans more of an incentive to reduce their carbon footprint, whether that's in what type of vehicle they drive (and how often/far), to what they set their thermostat, and how they choose to use energy or adopt alternative technologies like home solar.
