Economist Explains Why Carbon Offsets Are Economically Environmental
Sumayal Shrestha on June 1st, 2009
The New York Times has published an interesting article by Cornell University economist Robert H. Frank, who provides a compelling perspective on carbon offsets.
While the author acknowledges the role of cap-and-trade and carbon tax as excellent ways to raise emission costs, he stresses on the need to offset for a substantial reduction of CO2 levels in the atmosphere.
A carbon cap-and-trade system is functionally similar to a carbon tax. Both approaches would raise the cost of activities that generate carbon dioxide emissions, giving people a powerful incentive to reduce their carbon footprints. Carbon offsets are no substitute for the stronger incentives inherent in carbon taxes or cap-and-trade, but they can reinforce their effects. Both carbon taxes and permit auctions would also generate revenue that could be used to buy additional carbon offsets.
Dr. Frank also notes that “there is no reason that fraud should be harder to curb in carbon-offset markets than in other domains.” You can also read about verification, which is used by Carbonfund.org, at our website here.
Read the full Times article.
Illustration by David G. Klein, published in the Times
Like what you see? Check out these related posts:
- Carbonfund.org Speaks at Nat’l Press Club on Offsets, an Integral Climate Change Solution
- Carbon Offsets in Waxman-Markey Bill, An Overview
- NYTimes on Deforestation, Need for Forest-Based Carbon Offsets
- Point Carbon: US Needs Offsets to Meet Targets
- Carbonfund.org’s Co-Founder Featured in Seed Magazine
Follow @Carbonfundorg on Twitter!
[...] Editorial on the value of protecting forests and the need for forest-based carbon offsets; an article by Cornell University economist Robert H. Frank, who argues that offsets make economic sense; and an article by Glenn Hurowitz on the political [...]