Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

France sees initial carbon tax at 14 euros per metric ton

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 05:27 AM
Original message
France sees initial carbon tax at 14 euros per metric ton
Source: Reuters

PARIS (Reuters) - France plans to set a proposed carbon tax at 14 euros ($19.9) per metric ton of carbon dioxide starting from next year, Prime Minister Francois Fillon said in an interview to be published by Figaro magazine.

A special advisory panel, headed by former Socialist Prime Minister Michel Rocard, had recommended billing 32 euros for every metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted in 2010 and lifting the levy gradually to 100 euros per metric ton by 2030.

"We have decided to apply the tax in a progressive manner. Starting with the price per ton on the market, that is to say 14 euros," Fillon said in the article set to appear in the magazine's Saturday edition.

The proposed tax has sparked heavy criticism from intensive users of fuel such as farmers and fishermen who will see the cost of a liter of petrol rise as a result.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE5815IE20090903
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Is there no credit for carbon-dioxide users like farmers.
Photosynthesis means that plants take in CO2 and emit oxygen. Do farmers get a credit for the use of CO2, as opposed to the emission of CO2?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You might ask: if they didn't farm there, would the natural growth take in more CO2?
It's not a question to which I think there's an obvious answer. But, on the whole, people seem to think cutting down forests to get farmland doesn't help the CO2 balance, so I'd think that there shouldn't be a credit for farming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. You're not really serious about natural growth and CO2 are you?
Edited on Thu Sep-03-09 10:40 AM by robcon
Modern farming creates MUCH MORE O2 and uses MUCH MORE CO2 than nature. Single-crops in rows - fertilized, irrigated and pampered, grow much more rapidly and massively than natural growth.

I do, indeed, think it's a question that has an obvious answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Perfectly serious
Edited on Thu Sep-03-09 12:14 PM by muriel_volestrangler
because it seems to depend on how much carbon is sequestered in the soil in either natural or cultivated ground:

Options to mitigate CO2 emissions from agriculture include reducing emissions from present sources, and creating and strengthening carbon sinks. Options for increasing the role of agricultural land as a sink for CO2 include carbon storage in managed soils and carbon sequestration after reversion of surplus farm lands to natural ecosystems. However, soil carbon sequestration has a finite capacity over a period of 50-100 years, as new equilibrium levels of soil organic matter are established. Efforts to increase soil carbon levels have additional benefits in terms of improving the productivity and sustainability of agricultural production systems. Soils of croplands taken out of production in permanent set-asides and allowed to revert to native vegetation eventually could reach carbon levels comparable to their precultivation condition. Considering the 640 Mha of land currently under cultivation in the United States, Canada, the former Soviet Union, Europe, Australia, and Argentina, and assuming recovery of the soil carbon originally lost to cultivation, a permanent set-aside of 15% of the land area could sequester 1.5-3 Gt C (over 50-100 years).

A large-scale reversion or afforestation of agricultural land is only possible if adequate supplies of food, fiber, and energy can be obtained from the remaining area. This is currently possible in the European Union and United States through intensive farming systems. However, if farming intensity changes because of environmental concerns or changes in policy, this mitigation option may no longer be available.

Currently, only half of the conversion of tropical forests to agriculture contributes to an increase in productive cropland. The only way to break out of this cycle is through more sustainable use, improved productivity of existing farmland, and better protection of native ecosystems. These practices could help reduce agricultural expansion (hence deforestation) in humid zones, especially in Latin America and Africa.

Management practices to increase soil carbon stocks include reduced tillage, crop residue return, perennial crops (including agroforestry), and reduced bare fallow frequency. However, there are economic, educational, and sociological constraints to improved soil management in much of the tropics. Many tropical farmers cannot afford or have limited access to purchased inputs such as fertilizer and herbicides. Crop residues are often needed for livestock feed, fuel, or other household uses, which reduces carbon inputs to soil. To the extent that improved management is based on significantly increased fossil fuel consumption, benefits for CO2 mitigation will be decreased.

http://www.gcrio.org/ipcc/techrepI/agriculture.html


That was based on figures from the SAR of the IPCC, so there may have been different estimates since then; but I think that shows it's not an open-and-shut case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jakeXT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. bye bye farmers "Farmers take yet another blow: Nitrous oxide linked to ozone"
Nitrous oxide, a gas emitted by the application of nitrogen fertilizer to cornfields, already has been blamed for making the Earth hotter by contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090830/BUSINESS03/908300319/-1/SPORTS12


:rofl: they are really going for broke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
5. Vive la France!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC