A US price on carbon: Makes sense ... so not likely

What’s one of the single most promising strategies for reducing fossil fuel consumption, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and leveling the playing field for businesses that are actually taking steps to green their operations? A price on carbon.

And what strategy has been anathema to most leaders, climate-change deniers or not, in the oil-guzzling US? A price on carbon.

Which makes a recent Washington Post opinion piece calling for just that so extraordinary. Written by Democratic US Representatives Henry A. Waxman and Edward J. Markey and Republican former US Representatives Sherwood Boehlert and Wayne Gilchrest, the commentary — titled “Carbon emission policy could slash debt, improve environment” — offers carbon pricing as a budget-friendly alternative that’s preferable to either cutting spending for government programs or raising taxes on the rich.

“We could slash our debt by making power plants and oil refineries pay for the carbon emissions that endanger our health and environment. This policy would strengthen our economy, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, keep our skies clean — and raise a lot of revenue,” the group writes.

Not to mention, it would also finally give credit where credit is due for the many US companies that are already doing much to reduce their carbon footprints and boost sustainability. By selling carbon allowances or charging for carbon pollution — the two options raised in the commentary — the government could finally get businesses to put their money where their mouths are on “green” efforts, and separate the real sustainability leaders from the greenwashers.

Unfortunately, in the current political landscape, where some Republicans are actively attacking clean energy and other sustainability programs — even those undertaken by the military — getting Congress to even consider, much less adopt, a price on carbon will be, as Waxman acknowledged in a later interview, a “challenge.”

That’s putting it mildly. Why else do you think the two Republicans who helped pen the Washington Post piece are former representatives, not current ones?