A modest proposal for reversing climate change*
Forget carbon cap-trade-tax schemes. There are better ways to save the planet.
To: UN Secretary-General
From: John Swift, Policy Advisor on Climate Change
Date: 2018
As per your instructions, I have given the matter of rising greenhouse gas emissions considerable thought. It's perfectly accurate to say the crisis has reached a tipping point, and immediate action is now required. What this will be depends entirely on our convictions and our courage. My proposal, while modest, recognizes the urgency of the situation and lays out one possible course for remediation.
To recap, however, it's clear the 10-year program, begun in late 2008, to tax and cap carbon emissions around the world has been a dismal failure. Ever since the failure of Kyoto 6 in 2012, industrialized economies have been unwilling to subject their large, corporate interests to punitive environmental standards. Meanwhile, developing economies, such as China's and India's, have never been interested in slowing their consumption of the earth's dwindling supplies of oil.
As a result, most credible environmental research indicates climate change is accelerating at a previously unanticipated rate. The best estimates suggest the average global temperature will increase by three degrees (Celsius) before the end of the next decade, and that ocean levels will rise an additional four inches (on top of the six that accrued shortly after the Great Arctic Melt of 2015).
These are dangerous times, indeed. And they demand careful, workable, sustainable policies for reversing the deleterious effects of human activity on the planet. After consulting with many colleagues in a variety of fields "" men and women who have spent their careers working on the problem "" I believe I have isolated an entirely new way to address climate change. If implemented, it would radically reduce greenhouse gas emissions within five years "" by as much as 75 per cent of current levels. Furthermore, it would dramatically decrease the incidence of rolling famines and food riots on every continent almost immediately.
It has, perhaps, not escaped your attention that within the realm of human activity the biggest producers of carbon dioxide on the planet are, in fact, individual humans. Oxygen is inhaled, broken down by the body into the constituent compounds necessary for life, and waste products are exhaled in the form of CO2. Naturally, then, it only makes sense to tax oxygen "" or, more precisely, the oxygen individuals use to function.
This approach has many advantages over the old carbon cap-trade-and-tax mentality. Firstly, it's completely democratic in that everyone breathes. Secondly, it's fiscally flexible in that those who can afford more oxygen than their less well-heeled counterparts possess the wherewithal to pay a premium. Thirdly, it removes the onus on oil-burning industrial enterprises for reversing climate change, simply because they're not human beings and, therefore, not responsible. This, in turn, liberates markets to establish prices on every commodity from crude to corn in the best interests of corporate shareholders and, of course, international lenders.
The funds from this new tax would be deployed to construct massive carbon sequestration facilities to ensure that the overall objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions is met. One suggestion from a colleague posits large rocket-equipped canisters filled with CO2 shot into space at regular intervals. This, I submit, is somewhat far-fetched given the current state of space technology. Still, it's food for thought.
To ensure that the tax remains progressive (ie., those who have more, pay more to breathe) without falling prey to charges of inequity or unfairness, a minimum levy would be applied to every human being on the planet regardless of his or her income level. Those who are unwilling or unable to meet this obligation would be culled from the general population "" a move which would further reduce the damaging effects of mouth-breathing the world over. As I have indicated, I'm confident these measures will produce optimal results, and that reason will finally prevail over lunacy.
The future of humanity depends upon it.
*A satire in one memo. Alec Bruce is a Moncton-based writer. He may be reached via www.thebrucereport.com.
More Opinion
Search Articles
More CE Network Sites & Partners:
