A family-friendly day of action on Sandymount strand on June 15th will send politicians a signal, writes Breda O'Brien.
GIVEN THE deluges that characterised last summer, it would be entirely reasonable to wish to keep umbrellas furled this summer. The Stop Climate Chaos coalition hopes people will make an exception on June 15th, at 3pm on Sandymount strand, even if the sun is splitting the stones.
It wants us to bring a brolly to the beach, not as a sensible insurance against inclement weather, but in the hope that a sea of dancing umbrellas will send a message to the Government that people are taking climate change seriously. Described as a picnic for the planet, the umbrella action event is a fun, family-friendly day out, with face-painting and other activities, but it has a serious message.
The coalition wants a price put on carbon pollution. CO2 emissions destabilise established climate patterns and threaten the ecosystems on which all creatures depend. We need rapid progress on reducing emissions, and a simple way is to give people a financial incentive to reduce their use of fossil fuels.
The Government has set aside €290 million to buy carbon credits to offset the amount by which we overshoot our Kyoto targets. The trouble is that does nothing to discourage carbon emissions, and since it is an invisible tax, does nothing to alter behaviour.
Regardless of how eco-friendly you are, the fact that carbon credits are purchased out of general taxation means that every taxpayer is affected equally. In short, it is unfair.
While in complete agreement about the need to implement a price on carbon, various organisations within the coalition have different ideas as to what is the fairest way to go about it. For example, Cap-and-Share proposes that a cap should be set on emissions. Then, production authorisation permits would be shared out equally to every citizen. People would then sell them to local financial institutions. If they decided not to cash them in, it would mean that the overall amount of emissions permitted would be reduced. Fossil fuel energy companies would need to buy permits to cover the emissions created by the fuel they sell. Private citizens would not have to do so in order to purchase fuel. Selling the permits would offset the rise in fuel costs. If implemented globally, developing countries that use less energy would have more permits to sell, with significant positive implications for income.
However, other members of the coalition concur with the ESRI conclusion that a simple carbon levy would achieve many of the necessary aims. The programme for government promises to introduce a carbon levy. Among other aims, the Commission on Taxation set up by Brian Cowen is to "introduce measures to further lower carbon emissions and to phase in on a revenue-neutral basis appropriate fiscal measures, including a carbon levy, over the lifetime of the government". As usual, the devil is in the detail. "Phasing in" and "lifetime of the government" sound ominous to those who rightly believe that urgent action is needed. The commission was asked to start work immediately on the carbon tax, but does not have to report until September 2009. There is an option to issue an interim report, but the commission seems to favour waiting to deliver a complete report.
It will be very serious if steps are not taken in the next budget.
Certainly, new levies are never popular, but the alternative is even more stark. Experts like Sir Nicholas Stern have said that we have 10 years in which to act - and that was two years ago. We cannot afford to wait another year. At the moment, we are emitting 17.5 tonnes of climate pollution per person per year, which is far above the European average. Many of us will not change too much until it begins to affect us directly in our pockets.
Put simply, we should tax that which damages us, like carbon emissions, and use the revenues to remove taxes on other areas. Reducing employer taxes is one option, as in an economic downturn it will be important to encourage employment. Equally, it is essential that a carbon levy should not damage the poor, and the ESRI recommended that some of the revenue raised should be diverted to social welfare measures to prevent an undue burden falling on those who are already on the margins.
A carbon levy sends a clear signal that the Government is taking the "polluter pays" principle seriously. It will encourage both industry and domestic consumers to reduce their consumption of fossil fuels, and to substitute lower-carbon activities and products for higher-carbon ones.
British Columbia's carbon tax will come into effect on July 1st. It starts off relatively modestly, with estimates that a Toyota Prius driver will have to pay an extra 10 Canadian dollars a year, and a SUV driver 68 Canadian dollars. But it will ramp up over the lifetime of the government. Other countries have had carbon taxes for nearly two decades now.
It is important to remember that it makes economic sense, too. The economies that will thrive will be ones that are innovative, and reduce their fossil fuel dependency. Ireland is desperately vulnerable with regard to traditional energy sources. Yet we have the potential through various forms of wind and wave energy to become world leaders in alternative energy sources. Oil stocks becoming more scarce should give us an incentive to really tackle energy efficiency, renewable energy sources and more sustainable lifestyles.
It may seem incongruous to use a picnic with a festival atmosphere to alert people to the need for serious measures, but it is also a reminder that it's not all doom and gloom. We can rise to the moral and economic challenge of climate change - and doing so will enhance our lives, not destroy them. A sustainable lifestyle is slower-paced, healthier, more human and more community-oriented. So next Sunday, grab that brolly and have fun dancing with it on Sandymount strand, as a reminder to politicians that the long finger is no longer an acceptable option when it comes to climate change.