CRS In Focus Report: 'A Brief Comparison of Two Climate Change Mitigation Approaches: Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Tax (or Fee)'

A brief (two page) CRS In Focus report (12 February 2019) by Jonathan L. Ramseur: A Brief Comparison of Two Climate Change Mitigation Approaches: Cap-and-Trade and Carbon Tax (or Fee).

Download CRS_In_Focus_ CC_Mitigation_12Feb2019

The graphic is not from this report; it's from a piece by Chad Francour. 

Introduction
Almost all climate scientists agree that greenhouse gas (GHG) emission increases have contributed to observed climate change and that continued increases in GHG emissions will contribute to future climate change. Although a variety of efforts seeking to reduce GHG emissions are currently underway on the international level and in individual states or regional partnerships, federal policymakers and stakeholders have different viewpoints over what to do—if anything—about GHG emissions, future climate change, and related impacts.

For policymakers considering actions to reduce GHG emissions, various policy instruments are available. Over the last 15 years, many legislative proposals have involved market-based approaches, such as a GHG emissions cap- and-trade system or a carbon tax. These particular approaches may be considered in the 116th Congress and are discussed below. The information below provides an overview of two approaches while briefly addressing their similarities and differences.

Cutting to the chase...

Concluding Observations
Discussions of cap-and-trade and carbon tax approaches often center on their potential advantages in terms of emissions uncertainty and price uncertainty, respectively. The degree to which one approach has an advantage in a particular context, such as transparency or administration, would depend on the designs of the programs being assessed. In many cases, these differences may be addressed with specific design elements.

Although recent attention has largely focused on market- based mechanisms, policymakers can address emissions with other policy tools, including performance-based regulations, which currently apply to motor vehicle emissions, or promotion of mitigation technologies, such as carbon capture and sequestration. These tools could support market-based programs or function independently.

Enjoy!

"It does not require a majority to prevail; but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires in people's minds." - Samuel Adams

Comments

[Elaine Hanford]

Either one would likely work (NOT) as well as the failed cap & trade or purchase (fee) for wetlands program. Since the underlying assumption is that carbon dioxide is bad, then any consequent decisions are automatically suspect.