1

Carbon Emissions

Institutional affiliation

Professor name

Student name

Course

Date
 2

One of the global issues which have attracted academic researchers' attention is climate

change. Several problems have arisen due to climate change, including societal issues, economic

issues, technological issues, ecological imbalance, and global warming. All these issues are

considered to be primarily caused by the increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The reduction of

these greenhouse gases has become the international community's main agenda. The dominant

greenhouse gases that notably affect the environment include sulfur hexafluoride,

hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, and methane. Among the

greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide is considered to be the main contributor to climate change

globally. A report by the IEA (International Energy Agency) posted in February 2020 states that

the energy-linked global carbon dioxide release was at 33Gt in 2019. According to World

Development Indicators, the concentration of carbon dioxide increased in 1990 at 22.15Gt, while

in 2014, it was 36.14Gt.

Human activities are the primary causes of the increase in carbon emissions [ CITATION

Hee14 \l 2057 ]. Human activities include the emission of carbon dioxide in large quantities for

power generation and emissions from vehicles, industrial operations, and construction

operations. Most governments worldwide took various measures to reduce carbon dioxide

emission by using carbon trade and cap and carbon tax. But are the measures taken by the

government to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide effective? Some may argue that they are

effective, while others may say that they are ineffective. Some countries experience high rates of

success in carbon pricing, while others experience failure. Since some countries fail to

implement carbon pricing, it does not mean that the measures are ineffective. Governments may

either enforce an emissions-trading allowance system or levy a carbon tax to introduce a carbon

pricing scheme to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The establishment of a particular carbon
 3

price to encourage emission reductions is explicit in carbon taxation. Emissions-trading schemes

guarantee that emissions around the economies are kept below the 'emission limit' threshold,

allowing the market to set a suitable carbon price.

The introduction of carbon taxes in various countries comes with great benefits that can

reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The benefits include; encouraging the use of alternative

sources of energy. Higher carbon prices are expected to stimulate more powerful alternatives or

engines to carbon emissions to use for businesses and consumers. For instance, the production of

solar energy or hydrogen engines is more effective with carbon taxes. Carbon taxes increase

government revenue. Carbon tax revenues could be used to fund alternatives such as green

power, or the revenues collected can then be used to fix pollution damage. To minimize other

taxes, such as VAT, the more significant carbon tax can be used.

Success testimony of some countries. Countries with carbon taxes have shown promising

outcomes – leading to fewer carbon emissions than others and, in several instances, significant

decreases in CO2 emissions. Sweden adopted, for example, a carbon tax in 1991 of €33 per

tonne. The carbon tax has been amplified over time to €120 per tonne. (A reduced rate has been

earned in some sectors such as forestry, agriculture, and engineering). Sweden's emissions have

decreased by over 20 percent from mid-1990. Amid a period of strong economic growth, it is

now among the EU's most prosperous countries in reducing emissions. This demonstrates that

carbon tax can minimize carbon emissions without hindering economic growth and increasing

living standards. Carbon taxes enhances the environmental surroundings. With higher taxes,

businesses can minimize emissions and search for alternatives that lower the environment. It

would make solar energy much more efficient than conventional fossil fuels, for example.
 4

The benefits explained above show that how effectively carbon taxing would help in

reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Critics of the carbon tax have pointed out some drawbacks

that result from carbon taxing, which questions the effectiveness of the carbon taxes. Some

companies located in countries with imposed carbon tax may decide to change their production

to countries with lower or no carbon taxes. This may provide an opportunity for developed

countries to promote pollutant production processes, pollution 'outsourcing.' Companies that

have shifted production from their origin countries may have helped reduce emission in the

origin country but increased carbon dioxide emission in another. This means that the carbon tax

was not effective in reducing the carbon dioxide emission; they have just been shifted from one

region to another. Imposing of high carbon taxes may lead to companies hiding the carbon

emissions. Carbon taxes may only be effective in developed countries that have the financial

ability to administer the tax. Some developing countries may find it challenging to implement the

carbon tax as it may be expensive.

Cap and trade systems allow companies to emit carbon dioxide, but companies can sell

and buy allowances up to a certain limit, only allowing them to emit a specific amount. This

system comes with various benefits that make it be viewed effectively by others, such as

Emissions restricted by caps; the regime sets the level for a specific sector or, preferably, the

entire nation. The fines for infringements are also determined. The primary goals of these caps

are carbon dioxide and related emissions causing global warming. Other pollutants that cause

smog may also be capped. The heat-trapping greenhouse gas is a mixture of carbon dioxide in

the upper atmosphere and worldwide. Locally, the elimination of pollution decreases worldwide.

The total limit amount is divided into allowances, allowing one ton of pollution each for a

business. The government distributes the allowances either gratuitously or via an auction to the
 5

firms. The cap typically declines over time and gives companies and industries an increasing

enticement to reduce their emissions more efficiently while retaining lower production costs. The

cap and trade benefits show that it is effective in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Still, critics

of the cap and trade is an ineffective way of reducing carbon dioxide emission. They say that the

carbon dioxide trade and cap schemes have not been successful in lowering emissions. The ETS

(European Trading Scheme for Emissions) started in 2005. Phase 1 did not reduce carbon

dioxide releases between 2005 and 2007. Overall emissions have instead risen by 1.9% over that

time[ CITATION Eur08 \l 1033 ]. European politicians recognize that trade and cap are detrimental

economically and more employment to be cost by these policies to cost, particularly during these

challenging times. Recently, Angela Merkel, a German Chancellor, said she would discourage

European Union climate regulation to "take decisions that threaten investments or jobs in

Germany."

The pollution cap and sulfur trading cannot be compared with the carbon dioxide cap and

trading. Caps and trade supporters demonstrate how competitive and straightforward an

economy-wide cap and trade scheme on CO 2 will be easy to enforce as the sulfur dioxide

program. But the emissions are not equal between and carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Just

110 coal-fired power stations were targeted when the sulfur dioxide program began. It was

eventually extended to 445 power stations[ CITATION Ken07 \l 1033 ]. Emissions come from

millions of sources, including farm animals, fertilizer production, furnaces, ships, vehicles,

trains, aircraft, power generation, greenhouse gas emissions are being released. There is a

significant gap in controlling millions of diverse and individual sources of pollution from 445.

Also, before the program came into practice, there were several low-cost ways to regulate sulfur

dioxide. This does not refer to technologies for the control of carbon dioxide. There are no
 6

commercially available control technologies at affordable prices. One way to minimize the

emissions of sulfur dioxide is by using "lowly sulfur coal," nonetheless, "lowly carbon dioxide

coal" is not available.

The question about how effective or ineffective the trade and cap carbon taxes schemes

may be in reducing carbon dioxide emission may be challenging to answer since both sides of

the question present evidence of how effective or ineffective those methods are. Carbon taxes

and carbon trade and cap have various benefits that show how effective they may reduce carbon

dioxide releases. Sweden is a nation that has successfully reduced carbon dioxide releases by

imposing a carbon levy that increases from time to time. But drawbacks that arise from the

implementation of either of them show that they are ineffective ways of reducing carbon dioxide

emissions.
 7

References

  European Union (May 23, 2008), Emissions trading: 2007 verified emissions from EU ETS

businesses, http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?

reference=IP/08/787&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage

Global CO2 emissions in 2019 [Internet]. Paris: International Energy Agency; 2020 Feb 11 [cited

2021 Feb 1]. Available from: https://www.iea.org/articles/global-co2-emissions-in-2019.

Green, K. P., Hayward, S. F., & Hassett, K. A. (2007). Climate change: caps vs. taxes.

http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.26286/pub_detail.asp

The World Bank Group (2018). World Development Indicators. (Accessed on February 1, 2021).

Available online: https://data.worldbank.org.

Heede, R. (2014). Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel

and cement producers, 1854–2010. Climatic change, 122(1), 229-

241.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-013-0986-y