UN report specifies exact amount needed to combat Global Climate Change

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/08/a-240-per-gallon-gas-tax-to-fight-global-warming-new-un-report-suggests-carbon-pricing/

From the article: A new U.N. report suggests a $240 per gallon gas tax equivalent is needed to fight global warming. A newly released report from the U.N. says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton in the year 2100.

If you think that’s unlikely to ever happen, you’re probably right.

A United Nations special climate report suggests a tax on carbon dioxide emissions would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton at the end of the century to effectively limit global warming.

For Americans, that’s the same as a $240 per gallon tax on gasoline in the year 2100, should such a recommendation be adopted. In 2030, the report says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $5,500 — that’s equivalent to a $49 per gallon gas tax.

If you think that’s an unlikely scenario, you’re probably not wrong. However, it’s what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, released Sunday night, sees as a policy option for reducing emissions enough to keep projected warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

The IPCC’s report is meant to galvanize political support for doubling down on the Paris climate accord ahead of a U.N. climate summit scheduled for December. The report calls for societal changes that are “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the stretch goal of the Paris accord.

1+

Users who have liked this post:

  • avatar

3 thoughts on “UN report specifies exact amount needed to combat Global Climate Change”

  1. Just kill all those pesky humans, and the world will be just fine.

    Environmental wackos can go first.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  2. RB49:
    Just kill all those pesky humans, and the world will be just fine.

    Environmental wackos can go first.

    Then, after their gone, we’ll notice such a marked improvement that no one else need die.

    The EU hates America. It’s interesting how the technologies and affordability of certain amenities during our founding altered our city and civilization formation. We are nowhere near as cramped as Europe is. But also, Europeans still had a nobility and family structure for quite sometime and we were literally built by people who left their families behind to find fortunes in a New World. It’d be interesting to know how that willingness to uproot affected our civi-formation, too. We end up being more widespread with urban pockets needing connection.

    Seems about right that Americans would invent the automobile and airplanes.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  3. Stina:

    RB49:
    Just kill all those pesky humans, and the world will be just fine.

    Environmental wackos can go first.

    Then, after their gone, we’ll notice such a marked improvement that no one else need die.

    The EU hates America. It’s interesting how the technologies and affordability of certain amenities during our founding altered our city and civilization formation. We are nowhere near as cramped as Europe is. But also, Europeans still had a nobility and family structure for quite sometime and we were literally built by people who left their families behind to find fortunes in a New World. It’d be interesting to know how that willingness to uproot affected our civi-formation, too. We end up being more widespread with urban pockets needing connection.

    Seems about right that Americans would invent the automobile and airplanes.

    One long lasting efect as far as differences between Europeans and Americans:

    When I lived in Norway the summer of 1979, I asked my Norwegian buddies  if they had anything similar to our American block parties.

    They were intrigued by the idea of block parties. They had never heard of them.

    It simply wouldn’t be done in Scandinavia – at least not at that time. People associated with families and friends. The notion that people would willingly associate with others based on their being neighbors was a very foreign attitude. After all, the neighbors down the street might be new comers.

    We further discussed the matter. In my naivete regarding European attitudes, I was sure that maybe newcomers were people having arrived in a community some  ten or twenty years prior. It came to light that the “newcomers” were people who had arrived 150 years ago to the community, rather than the preferred designation of having arrived 200 years prior!

    Our American frontier would never have come about with such an attitude. People were forced to be friendly with others in order to survive. If your cabin burned down during the winter, you had to hope someone within two miles of you would take you in. And that was not likely if your family had failed to be friendly with the folks in your local area, regardless of your family not knowing their family some  200 years before.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar

Leave a Reply