Sometimes I answer my own questions....
Quote:
We find that despite significant price increases for some fueltypes, the carbon tax effect on emissions was modest. The taxes contributed to a reduction in onshore
emissions of only 1.5 percent and total emissions of 2.3 percent
|
Hrmm, that's rather small.
http://weber.ucsd.edu/~carsonvs/papers/632.pdf
Quote:
|
The tax covers most types of fossil fuels. Since it came in, B.C.’s total use of those fuels has dropped by 16.1% (2008-13). By contrast, in the rest of Canada fuel use went up by 3% over that time.
|
http://business.financialpost.com/fp...ax-shift-works
Wonder if anything else contributed? What sectors saw the largest decrease? Consumers or industry?
Quote:
|
Accordingly, the European environmental tax reforms had by 2004 caused reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of 3.1% on average for the six member countries examined, with the largest fall recorded for Finland (5.9%).
|
https://sapiens.revues.org/1072
along different lines...
Quote:
|
The tax breaks were missing in large part because Obama wanted a plan that would not require congressional approval (which he will not get). But a new congressionally mandated study by the National Academy of Sciences concludes that extending the sort of energy-related tax preferences that are already scattered throughout the Revenue Code would do little or nothing to reduce greenhouse gasses.
|
http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/.../#3ff3b49011d0
What I found in admittedly a brief search is...not much. I would have that it was an easy question to Google and find lots of definitive answers. Is nobody studying this? Seams like something you would want to know...
3.1% isn't all that big either.