Examining Carbon Tax as the Optimal Solution for Climate Change Issues

This essay examines the effectiveness of a carbon tax as a solution for climate change. It discusses the potential benefits of carbon tax, such as reducing carbon emissions and encouraging investment in renewable energy sources. However, it also highlights the challenges and drawbacks, including increased administrative costs, the potential for companies to relocate to avoid the tax, and the lack of a globally harmonized system. The essay references examples from countries that have implemented carbon taxes and considers the difficulties faced by large, heavily populated nations in effectively imposing and collecting the tax. Ultimately, the essay concludes that while carbon tax can contribute to reducing carbon emissions, it is not the best or a complete solution for addressing climate change due to these limitations and suggests exploring alternative policies and global participation in environmental programs.

Running head: CLIMATE CHANGE 0
English Essay
Carbon tax is the best solution for
climate change?

CLIMATE CHANGE 1
Climate change is defined as the change in the global environment which occurred due to
direct or indirect human practices. It is a result of increasing greenhouse gases in the
environment due to human activities such as deforestation, use of non-renewable energy
sources and burning of fossil fuel (Pindyck, 2013, p.865). In order to address this issue, the
government can impose a carbon tax on carbon emissions of companies and people. A carbon
tax is a fee that is imposed by the government on the use of fossil fuels or carbon-based fuels
including gas, coal and oil (Murray and Rivers, 2015, p.678). Many countries including the
United Kingdom, Sweden, Australia, Ireland and Chile has imposed a carbon tax policy
(Carbon Tax, 2018, n.p). The issue is whether imposition of a carbon tax can assist in
reducing carbon emissions caused by corporations and individuals that cause climate change.
A carbon tax can increase the administrative costs for implementation and collection of tax
which will slow down economic growth of countries. A carbon tax did not guarantee that
carbon emissions will be reduced because companies can shift their locations to avoid carbon
tax. Although the carbon tax can reduce carbon emissions by eliminating the use of fossil fuel
in the manufacturing process, and it can increase the investment in renewable energy sources
such as sunlight, tides, wind and biomass. However, carbon tax is not an effective option for
mitigating the risk of climate change.
It is difficult to increase investment in renewable energy because the administrative costs
relating to managing and collecting of the carbon tax will be substantially high that will slow
down the country’s economy. The government has to make high investments to ensure that
every organisation pay carbon tax accordingly and it became a new burden for manufacturing
firms, customers, society and the government. The manufacturing companies are more likely
to increase prices for their products and services to mitigate the carbon tax expenses which
increase the financial burden of the public (Conefrey et al., 2013, p.941). Furthermore,
investors are less likely to invest in countries that impose a carbon tax to save capital which
reduces their economy. In Australia, 93.38 percent of the energy consumed through fossil
fuel which makes it difficult for the government to encourage organisations to use renewable
energy sources (Trading Economics, 2018, n.p). Therefore, if a carbon tax is imposed, then
prices of products and services will increase, and investment will decrease which will slow
down the economic growth.
However, a carbon tax can reduce carbon emissions of companies and individuals and
increase the investment in renewable energy sources. Carbon tax encourages organisations to
develop environment-friendly technology instead of using fossil fuels that are easily available

CLIMATE CHANGE 2
and relatively cheaper but has a harmful impact on the environment. Due to a high rate of
carbon tax, people would make efforts to find new and alternative sources of energy that are
environment-friendly such as wind, solar energy, biomass, and tides (Ploeg and Withagen,
2014, p.283). For example, Australian companies are investing in wind power as a source of
renewable energy which has grown 35 percent in five years up to 2011. These wind power
sources generate 4,455 megawatts (MW) of energy as of 2017, and they are expected to
increase up to 18,823 MW (Ramblingsdc, 2015, n.p). Therefore, if a carbon tax is imposed,
then investment in renewable energy increases which address the issue of climate change.
Although a carbon tax encourages investment in renewable energy, it is far from being an
effective solution for climate change. Organisations are more likely to increase their products
and services prices rather than investing in renewable energy sources because they require
high level of investment. The government will also face difficulty in investing in renewable
energy sources because the administration cost of imposing and collecting of carbon tax is
substantially high (Aldy and Stavins, 2012, p.176). Investors also did not prefer to invest in
countries that impose a high rate of carbon tax that would negatively affect the nation’s
economic growth (Carl and Fedor, 2016, p.57). If carbon tax is imposed, then purchasing
power and real (inflation-adjusted) salaries of people will be reduced. Therefore, carbon tax
negatively affects a country’s economic growth.
The government aims to reduce carbon emissions of corporations and people by imposing a
carbon tax; however, it did not guarantee that global carbon emission will be reduced. One of
the major contributors of greenhouse gases is manufacturing organisations; instead of paying
a high rate of the carbon tax, these corporations can shift their production facilities to
countries in which there is no policy of carbon tax (Martin, De Preux and Wagner, 2014, p.1).
More than 53 percent of manufacturing work has been outsourced by companies to China and
India because of lower labour costs and lack of carbon tax (Statistic Brain, 2017, n.p).
Therefore, if a harmonised carbon tax system is not applied worldwide, then it cannot reduce
carbon emissions of large companies since they can switch their production location which
reduces the impact of a carbon tax system.
A carbon tax reduces the negative impact of climate change by reducing huge amount of
carbon emissions caused by manufacturing companies and individuals that increase
greenhouse gases in the environment. If the government did not make appropriate efforts to
reduce carbon emissions, then, it will damage the environment and its resources. In order to

CLIMATE CHANGE 3
preserve the environment, the level of carbon dioxide emission is required to decrease that
can be achieved by the imposition of a carbon tax (Samimi and Zarinabadi, 2012, p.1012). In
Sweden, from 2000 to 2012, greenhouse gas emissions reduced by 16 percent (OCED, 2014,
p.4). Between 1990 and 2005, Demark reported a reduction in carbon emissions per person
by 15 percent (Nunez, 2018, n.p). As a result, if carbon tax is imposed, then environmental
conditions can be improved.
However, carbon tax cannot completely mitigate the risk of climate change because it did not
implement across the world. It is not a suitable option due to lack of a globally harmonised
carbon tax system. Countries such as Norway and Finland are able to effectively implement
carbon tax because of stable economic conditions and low population in the country (Di
Cosmo and Hyland, 2013, p.409). However, in large nations such as China, India, EU and
USA, it is difficult for governments to impose and collect tax from all organisations
effectively (Li et al., 2013, p.927). Countries such as China and India are heavily populated,
and they make about 37 percent of world’s total carbon emissions (China 30 percent and
India 7 percent) (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017, n.p). If not efforts
made by these two nations for reducing carbon emissions, then it is difficult to reduce carbon
emissions around the world by imposing carbon tax. Therefore, carbon tax is not a suitable
option.
In conclusion, a carbon tax policy can reduce carbon emissions of organisations and
individuals, and it can increase the investment in green energy sources which can address the
issue of climate change. However, governments face many financial and economic
difficulties while implementing a carbon tax policy. It increases the financial burden on
companies, people and government. Moreover, corporations can switch their production
location to avoid carbon tax due to lack of harmonised carbon tax system worldwide.
Therefore, carbon tax is not the best solution for addressing the issue of climate change.
Thus, governments should seek other policies for addressing the issue of climate change such
as eco-friendly transportation system or recycling and companies across the world should
participate in such programs worldwide.

CLIMATE CHANGE 4
References
Aldy, JE and Stavins, RN 2012, ‘The promise and problems of pricing carbon: Theory and
experience’, The Journal of Environment & Development, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 152-180.
Carbon Tax 2018, Where Carbon Is Taxed, Carbon Tax, viewed 31 March 2018,
<https://www.carbontax.org/where-carbon-is-taxed/>
Carl, J and Fedor, D 2016, ‘Tracking global carbon revenues: A survey of carbon taxes
versus cap-and-trade in the real world’, Energy Policy, vol. 96, pp. 50-77.
Conefrey, T, Fitz Gerald, JD, Valeri, LM and Tol, RS 2013, ‘The impact of a carbon tax on
economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions in Ireland’, Journal of Environmental
Planning and Management, vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 934-952.
Di Cosmo, V and Hyland, M 2013, ‘Carbon tax scenarios and their effects on the Irish energy
sector’, Energy Policy, vol. 59, pp. 404-414.
Li, A, Zhang, A, Cai, H, Li, X and Peng, S 2013, ‘How large are the impacts of carbon-
motivated border tax adjustments on China and how to mitigate them?’, Energy Policy, vol.
63, pp. 927-934.
Martin, R, De Preux, LB and Wagner, UJ 2014, ‘The impact of a carbon tax on
manufacturing: Evidence from microdata’, Journal of Public Economics, vol.117, pp. 1-14.
Murray, B and Rivers, N 2015, ‘British Columbia’s revenue-neutral carbon tax: A review of
the latest “grand experiment” in environmental policy’, Energy Policy, vol. 86, pp. 674-683.
Nunez, C 2018, What’s A Carbon Tax, And How Does It Reduce Emissions?, National
Geographic, viewed 6 April 2018,

CLIMATE CHANGE 5
<http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/before-the-flood/articles/whats-a-carbon-tax-and-
how-does-it-reduce-emissions/>
OCED 2014, Environmental Performance Reviews: Sweden, OCED, viewed 6 April 2018,
<https://www.oecd.org/environment/country-reviews/Sweden%20Highlights%20web
%20pages2.pdf>
Pindyck, RS 2013, ‘Climate change policy: What do the models tell us?’, Journal of
Economic Literature, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 860-72.
Ploeg, F and Withagen, C 2014, ‘Growth, renewables, and the optimal carbon
tax’, International Economic Review, vol. 55, no. 1, p. 283.
Ramblingsdc 2015 Wind power and wind farms in Australia, Ramblingsdc viewed 6 April
2018, <http://www.ramblingsdc.net/Australia/WindPower.html>
Samimi, A and Zarinabadi, S 2012, ‘Reduction of greenhouse gases emission and effect on
environment’, Journal of American Science, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 1011-1015.
Statistic Brain 2017, Job Overseas Outsourcing Statistics, Statistic Brain viewed 6 April
2018, <https://www.statisticbrain.com/outsourcing-statistics-by-country/>
Trading Economics 2018, Australia – Fossil fuel energy consumption (% of total), Trading
Economics, viewed 6 April 2018, <https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/fossil-fuel-energy-
consumption-percent-of-total-wb-data.html>
United States Environmental Protection Agency 2017, Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Data, EPA, viewed 6 April 2018, <https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-
gas-emissions-data>