Fee & dividend: A climate solution all sides can agree on

What do George Shultz of the Hoover Institution, climate scientist James Hansen, former Republican Congressman Bob Inglis and evangelical climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe have in common? All support the Citizens’ Climate Lobby’s revenue-neutral Carbon Fee and Dividend Act.

This act would significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions while benefiting the economy – unlike relatively inefficient regulatory cap-and-trade approaches.

Though many Americans, including 57 percent in Stanislaus County, still believe scientists are debating the fundamentals of climate change, in reality the debate has long since been settled. After more than 40 years of intense study, more than 97 percent of climate scientists and every major scientific association concur: We are the primary driver of present climate change.

We also know that CO₂, once emitted, remains in the atmosphere a very long time and some is temporarily dissolved into the oceans. As a result, the full effects of our present emissions won’t be felt until decades later. That’s why it is imperative to reduce emissions now. Otherwise, we risk an unmanageable future, as envisioned by studies conducted by the Pentagon, with increased ocean acidification and a permanent reduction of our ability to produce food.

If we do nothing, we’ll feel the effects even here in Stanislaus County in more drought, fewer chilling days for fruit and more evaporation loss of our water. Our air quality, already ranked the worst in the nation, will get even worse.

Here is some good news: Contrary to media portrayals, Republicans increasingly accept the science of climate change. Just last week, more than 800 Citizens’ Climate Lobby volunteers, including a member of our Modesto chapter, visited more than 500 House and Senate offices in Washington, including the staff of local Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Turlock.

“In meeting after meeting with Republican offices, the unspoken agreement seemed to be: ‘Let’s not argue about the science; let’s talk about solutions and where we might find common ground,’” said CCL director Mark Reynolds. Only rarely, he said, was there “pushback from a staff or member of Congress about the science of climate change.”

Here is more good news: A revenue-neutral carbon fee-and-dividend plan appeals to Republicans and Democrats and to conservatives and liberals. The plan minimizes government intrusion and maximizes the power of the market while protecting the poor and middle class. It would create 2.8 million jobs and add $70 billion to $90 billion to the gross domestic product, according to a nonpartisan Regional Economic Models Inc. study.

More importantly, it would cut CO₂ emissions in half within 20 years. Using border adjustments, it also would incentivize global participation in reducing CO₂ while protecting American companies.

Here’s how it would work: When CO₂ is extracted, as in oil drilling or coal mining, a small but annually increasing carbon fee is assessed as the fossil fuels are introduced into the economy. All of the fee is held in a carbon fee trust fund and returned directly to each American household, Alaska-style, as a dividend check each month. The only costs required are to collect and disburse the fees and administer the border adjustments – about 0.4 percent of the total collected.

For the vast majority of American households, dividend checks would more than pay for increased energy costs and goods sensitive to fossil-fuel price increases. This feature protects family budgets, frees households to make independent choices about energy use, spurs innovation and builds demand for low-carbon products.

This measure is consistent with conservative, liberal and environmental values. It is consistent with Pope Francis’ recent encyclical, calling on all of us to reduce carbon emissions. It is consistent with good stewardship of our only Earth.

This story was originally published July 9, 2015 at 2:47 PM with the headline "Fee & dividend: A climate solution all sides can agree on."