A barrel of oil fetches about US$80 on the global market. Consider the power of that price: It has driven extensive human endeavor, trillions of dollars in investment, technological breakthroughs, the creation of some of the world’s largest companies — all to extract fossil fuels from wherever in the world they can be found.
The burning of those fuels, among other things, would put about 36 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into Earth’s atmosphere this year. Policymakers would like to push that number to zero.
However, getting there requires a powerful incentive — which is why governments must put a price on carbon as soon as possible.
A carbon tax would be the best approach. It would redirect investment toward green projects and allow governments to cut other taxes. However, the politics have so far proved insurmountable. Rich nations fear higher energy costs and a loss of competitiveness. Developing nations with carbon-intensive economies worry that they would pay more than their fair share. As of last year, sufficient carbon taxes applied to less than 5 percent of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions.
Another option is carbon trading, whereby governments impose emissions limits and let markets set the price. Participants able to reduce more can sell credits to those that cannot. The EU’s trading system, the largest of 36 such plans covering about one-fifth of global emissions, has set the cost of a tonne of carbon as high as US$110 (it is lower now, thanks partly to a clean-energy boom). In the separate, unregulated offset market, green-minded companies fund everything from carbon-capture technology in Denmark to forest conservation in Zimbabwe.
However, unifying those markets to achieve something close to a global price remains a distant prospect. Emissions reductions are not fungible like physical commodities: A tonne from a country with weak oversight might not be worth much — a tree-saving offset can go up in smoke or be an outright fraud. Prices range as low as US$1 per tonne for the shoddiest offsets, good for only the most desultory greenwashing. Quality-control efforts, laudable as they are, have a long way to go. Unless mitigation is perfect and permanent, crediting it against real emissions leaves the world further from net zero.
Meanwhile, valuable time is being lost. To prevent global warming from crossing the red line of 2°C, greenhouse gas emissions must be at least 25 percent lower in 2030 than they were in 2019. Pledges under the Paris Agreement would achieve only an 11 percent reduction. The global weighted average price of carbon is about US$5 per tonne, less than one-10th the minimum estimated level required to keep climate change in check.
Workable solutions are within reach. For examle, experts at the IMF have proposed price floors that governments could establish using taxes, carbon trading or equivalent measures. If set from US$35 to US$145 for the lowest-income to the highest-income countries, and combined with adequately ambitious emissions targets, that approach should be enough to get the world back on track to stay below 2°C.
What is needed is a deal that gets a critical mass of big countries moving together. Pressure is building — the EU’s new border adjustment, which taxes imports not subject to carbon prices, offers an impetus for the bloc’s trading partners to cooperate. With the right incentives in place, people and companies would seek the best and fastest ways to reduce emissions, potentially delivering vast economic benefits. The longer the delay, the more difficult the task would be.
The Bloomberg Editorial Board publishes the views of the editors across a range of national and global affairs.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Ahead of US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) meeting today on the sidelines of the APEC summit in South Korea, an op-ed published in Time magazine last week maliciously called President William Lai (賴清德) a “reckless leader,” stirring skepticism in Taiwan about the US and fueling unease over the Trump-Xi talks. In line with his frequent criticism of the democratically elected ruling Democratic Progressive Party — which has stood up to China’s hostile military maneuvers and rejected Beijing’s “one country, two systems” framework — Lyle Goldstein, Asia engagement director at the US think tank Defense Priorities, called
A large majority of Taiwanese favor strengthening national defense and oppose unification with China, according to the results of a survey by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). In the poll, 81.8 percent of respondents disagreed with Beijing’s claim that “there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China,” MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) told a news conference on Thursday last week, adding that about 75 percent supported the creation of a “T-Dome” air defense system. President William Lai (賴清德) referred to such a system in his Double Ten National Day address, saying it would integrate air defenses into a
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.