Marchers carried tiny wind model turbines to the White House on Saturday, along with banners supporting solar energy, carbon taxes and pipeline resistance.
Exxon Mobil Corp. commands attention and gets it.
So energy and climate experts naturally took notice last week when CEO Darren Woods said charging a fee on greenhouse gases across the United States is a good idea.
"A uniform price of carbon applied consistently across the economy is a sensible approach to emissions reduction," Woods said in a statement (Climatewire, Feb. 24).
In his first blog post since succeeding Rex Tillerson, the new head of Exxon Mobil Corp. focused on climate change, calling for a carbon tax to discourage use of polluting fuels.
The baking of planet Earth is proceeding without interruption. Last year was the hottest year on record, according to NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — edging out 2015, which had taken the crown from 2014. Of the world's 17 warmest documented years, 16 have come in this century.
The most important thing about a carbon tax plan proposed last week may be the people behind it: prominent Republicans like James Baker III, George Shultz and Henry Paulson Jr. Their endorsement of the idea, variations of which have been suggested before, may be a breakthrough for a party that has closed its eyes to the perils of man-made climate change and done everything in its power to thwart efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The Feb. 9 article “GOP statesmen propose replacing Obama climate policies with carbon tax” failed to remind readers of a compelling reason — highly relevant to the current debate over tax reform — that a carbon tax is the most workable approach to addressing carbon emissions. Any regime we adopt must have a means to impose our “carbon price” on imports. If not, we can expect major producers of climate gases (e.g., steel furnaces) to be replaced by plants in low-carbon-cost countries (long known as “leakage”).