On Nov. 7, approximately 30 community members braved the rain to attend an informational session on carbon pricing hosted by the Unitarian Universalist Church. Seated on folding chairs in the UU Fellowship Building, attendees sipped coffee and snacked on doughnuts from local favorite Ruby Donuts while two members of the nonprofit environmental advocacy group Citizens’ Climate Lobby, David Radue and Ethan Payne—a Bromfield graduate—gave a thorough presentation of the issue.
Radue and Payne explained that carbon pricing is based on a fee and dividend structure. The fee on fossil fuels is assessed where the fuel enters the market, and consumers pay in proportion to their fuel consumption. For example, a Harvard resident who chooses to buy an apple imported from Chile will pay more for that apple than for one grown at Carlson Orchards because of the fossil fuel it took to import that apple. Similarly, a consumer who drives a fuel-inefficient Hummer will pay more at the gas pump than a Prius driver. Both of those consumers, despite their differing emissions, will be issued a regular dividend from the revenues collected from the carbon fee. This market-based approach would disincentivize fossil fuel use, and therefore, presumably, lead to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon pricing has been derided by some as too complex, but as Bill Nye succinctly puts it in his explanation on “Last Week Tonight” with John Oliver: “When something costs more, people buy less of it.”
The presentation included some compelling statistics from a report commissioned by Citizens’ Climate Lobby and prepared by Regional Economic Models Inc. and Synapse Energy Economics Inc. The report detailed savings in both monetary figures and human lives. It found that over the course of 10 years, 2.1 million more jobs would be created in an economy with a carbon tax than under baseline conditions, due to an increase in labor-intensive jobs like health care and retail. A possible $70 billion to $85 billion could be added to the GDP from 2020 onward. In addition, a predicted 13,000 lives would be saved annually after 10 years, and 227,000 cumulatively after 20, due to a reduction in air pollution.
Also in attendance at the event was state Rep. Jen Benson, lead sponsor of H.2810, “An Act to Promote Green Infrastructure and Reduce Carbon Emissions.” Benson’s bill has a whopping 95 co-sponsors in the state House of Representatives, and 11 in the state Senate. Under this legislation, carbon would be priced at $20 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent burned, increasing to $40 per ton over five years. While proposed federal carbon tax legislation would be revenue-neutral, the Massachusetts bill would return 70% of the fee revenue in dividends to tax payers, and put 30% into a Green Infrastructure Fund to support renewable energy projects, clean transit, climate resiliency programs, and the like.
Following the presentation, there was a 20-minute question-and-answer session, which the supportive crowd unanimously voted to extend when the time was up. Audience members asked about several potential challenges, including protecting rural communities and accounting for border adjustments on imported goods. Benson explained that her legislation does address these concerns by, among other measures, not accounting for emissions from farm animals and instituting protections for industries that could face competition from other states that do not tax carbon emissions.
Some lawmakers are wary of supporting a carbon tax bill, as voters have strongly rebuked gas tax measures in the past. However, anyone who falls into the middle income quintile or below can expect to make money from this policy, said Benson. She explained that the average family this year could expect to pay $430 in fees, but receive back $470 in rebate checks, which would be issued, at a minimum, biannually. Those who fall in the upper quintiles would pay more, but Radue explained, “You’re not paying more because you’re wealthy; you’re paying more because you’re polluting more.” According to a London School of Economics and Political Science study, families with higher incomes emit more carbon dioxide from just driving their cars than lower-income households do from all emissions sources.
Following the Q&A, Payne and Radue encouraged participants to take action by calling legislators in support of both state and federal carbon taxes, and adding their names to a petition of support. Said Payne, “This is a great opportunity for Massachusetts to lead the way and provide an example for the rest of the country.”
