this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
556 points (97.8% liked)

News

23320 readers
3171 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • Only 57 fossil fuels and cement producers have been responsible for most of the world's CO2 emissions since 2016, according to the Carbon Majors report by InfluenceMap
  • Saudi Aramco, Gazprom, and Coal India were the top three CO2-emitting companies during this period.
  • InfluenceMap's database aims to increase transparency around climate change contributors for legal, academic, campaign, and investor purposes.

Archive.org

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 27 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (5 children)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

In theory, making the commodity more expensive changes some decisions about how much to use

In theory, the vice tax goes toward mitigating the effects of the vice, or preventive efforts.

So, no. The tax isn’t enough to change behavior nor is the money raised enough to help prevent or mitigate, even if it were targeted to those efforts

The tax isn’t even nearly enough to cover road maintenance, although a little more should help

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I might argue that demand for gasoline is relatively inelastic. You can adjust the price quite a bit before people change their consumption habits, simply because transit options are inflexible and relatively small portions of one's overall budget.

A better alternative might be to invest in mass transit infrastructure - rail, bus, and bike/pedestrian options - that undercut the existing private car market. In cities like Tokyo, London, Moscow, Amsterdam, Shanghai, and NYC, where rail/bus/pedestrian options are abundant and commercial real estate isn't obligated to accommodate one car per visitor, you have much lower energy consumed per capita and much smaller amounts of waste generated when moving people and material equivalent distance.

We incentivize consumption based on our most cheap and abundant available mode of transit. I might argue that raising gas taxes and funneling that towards new road construction would have the opposite intended effect if your goal was reducing emissions.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

raising gas taxes and funneling that towards new road construction

That wasn’t my main point. However one of the criticisms of EVs in particular is they don’t pay for road upkeep via gas taxes. While true, gas taxes generally don’t cover maintenance anyway so that’s a weak point. There’s also a minor point that infrastructure that is overloaded or in poor condition does contribute to a variety of sustainability issues, including excess CO2 emissions. It’s definitely not the main point though.

Personally I would want a gas tax mostly targeted to transit or personal mobility but the key point being that it be scheduled to increase every year. Gasoline use is relatively inelastic in that you still need to get places and that may be your only choice, and the gas tax is low enough to not be a decider anyway. However, maybe the threat that it will continue to increase will help drive different decisions for the longer term. This lets us avoid punishing low income people with a large increase, while hopefully having a similar impact on decisions

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

However one of the criticisms of EVs in particular is they don’t pay for road upkeep via gas taxes.

You could make a very similar argument about 18-wheelers and other super-heavy vehicles. Road erosion scales geometrically to vehicle size, but gas consumption is - at best - linear. So the excess weight of the vehicle is effectively a free rider when you scale up from your Geo Metro to a Hummer.

Personally I would want a gas tax mostly targeted to transit or personal mobility but the key point being that it be scheduled to increase every year.

I mean, shy of a Gas Stalin doing environmental dictatorship shit, I don't see how this is politically feasible. A gas tax is already fairly regressive. Raising it annually would create a popular outburst with every turn of the ratchet. And you wouldn't even have the Mega-Corps/Banks on your side, unlike when landlords raise their rents.

Seems like an invitation to riots, not unlike what we've seen in Europe and the Middle East.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

If oil/fuel/emission is taxed, yes.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

It IS taxed. Virtually every state has a gas tax. California has one of the highest gas taxes in the nation, at $.51/gal.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Tax them more. Until burning oil for energy isn't economically feasible anymore.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Does the tax rate by state influence the energy consumption per capita?

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 2 points 7 months ago

Yeah, US states are a bit too independent imo.

[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Isn't that used for building and maintaining the roads?

[–] gaael@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

They do if they are high enough.

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Taxes in theory reduce consumption because the price increases, like the 25% tax on Chinese EVs levied by the U.S. to protect... the fossil fuel industry.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

the 25% tax on Chinese EVs levied by the U.S. to protect… the ~~fossil fuel industry~~ domestic EV market

If you want to talk about US fossil fuel protectionism, check out the patient on the nickel metal battery - first used in GE's EV1 to great success - which was purchased and squatted on by Texaco/Chevron for over twenty years.

Modern regulation is far more about insourcing the production of Lithium Ion batteries (a highly lucrative market for auto manufacturers because of the crazy market ups) than shielding the fossil fuel industries from a technology that's been widespread globally for over a decade.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee -3 points 7 months ago

No but they make liberals feel good, which has the same effect.