Skip to main content

Carbon dividend would return money to the consumer | Letter

May 22, 2019

In his May 21 column about the steps Pennsylvania must take now that Gov. Wolf has joined the U.S. Climate Alliance upholding the 2015 Paris Agreement goals, author Joseph O. Minott suggested "aggressive, unprecedented action."

The best way to reduce carbon emissions quickly — and the most palatable way to legislators — involves a market-driven approach. A severance tax or fee on fossil fuels at the well, mine, or port of entry would raise the cost of energy and inspire consumers to cut back or find alternative means. It would also spur entrepreneurs to find new energy solutions. Such a fee would unfortunately hurt low and fixed-income Americans, who would bear the brunt of the inevitable higher prices for energy.

In the U.S .House, HR 763, the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act seeks to address this inequity by returning the fees collected to every household on a per capita basis. This approach will drive down carbon pollution and encourage the move toward cleaner, cheaper alternates. It will also improve air quality and thus improve health and save lives, while creating new jobs, thanks to growth in the clean energy economy. And help the disadvantaged. Congresswoman Susan Wild of the Lehigh Valley has co-sponsored this legislation. It is awaiting introduction of a companion bill in the U.S. Senate.

Our Pennsylvania legislators ought to be thinking along the same lines. A carrot as well as a stick. More effective than cap-and-trade, and not a tax that government can spend as it sees fit. Consumers will choose how to spend their dividend.