Every time we say that time changes so do the situations, time changes so do the rule and regulations, time changes so do the moral obligations. But when the time is shifting in per-second level (I mean when we are contemporary living beings watching our own changes), it is difficult to notice what is exactly changing.
We have millions of articles which focus on the study of History and we have hundreds of documentaries which predict how our future is going to be. But a study on the change of present situations in an explicit manner is what I think is not much focussed upon. The same idea forms the soul of this post and takes the concept of 'carbon tax' as an instance to substantiate my position.
The crux of the story I am going to envisage is the carbon cycle. Yeah, as we mildly remember, analogous to the water cycle, we have a constant transfer of carbon to and from the bottom of the earth. Prior to the industrial era, we relied on the cutting of trees, slaughtering of whales and much more to meet our energy demands. But we 'instantaneously' shifted to the industrial era. That instant shift took centuries to start but merely 2 or 3 centuries to execute. The following 2 graphs say a lot:
As I was explaining about the carbon cycle, the credit for adding something to the carbon cycle goes to the Industrial era. Unfortunately, that something is the 'carbon'. The result is less absorption of carbon by the earth compared to the amount prevailing in our atmosphere. Talking about the direct impact, there is a danger signal to the coastal areas as they are super-sensitive to climate change. In the climate crisis due to obvious reasons, they are going to be the first ones to suffer. And problem elevates as you can see here:
What we pay now today is the commodity that has been borne out of burning fuels. No matter whether it belongs to this company or that country, once the word 'industrial' comes before any product, it should be understood the product is the outcome of industrial revolution. But wait, industrial revolution was also the outcome. Yes, it was. Of the era which saw the heavy killing of animals and forests. The era which was manually written. But since every era has its ending and some era just lasts not long, to un-declare them as era, it's time to move on from fossil fuel era completely to renewable source era.
Back to the point, I was talking about the money which we slog off for day and night. Although money we spend get subsidised by Government in some cases, but a latent equivalent of subsidy is what we are enjoying by virtue of our mute 'mother nature'. A direct analogy of this subsidy can be made with the money which we pay for garbage collection. Since, garbage adds waste product to nature, we pay money so that authorities may recycle them to useful products. Same thing goes with carbon. Industries eject 'carbon' to atmosphere adhering to laws which limits their rate of ejection. But, can't we take carbo-tax from them so that they're forced to use better ways of production and produce less carbon. Although, the argument seems quite literal in a sense. But , the image below is enough to stress the problem :
Thus, it is evitable that this 'garbage' in our atmosphere is really a big subject to worry about. The idea of Carbon tax also seems quite reasonable. But, 'change' and 'success' are two amazing words that have miles of gap between them.
If we think to wait, there are two extreme results that can follow:
As scientists predict worst case to be more probable, waiting means getting screwed up.
Hence, a neutral carbon tax is the term getting preached by most climate think tanks. 'Neutral' means that tax extracted from carbon expulsion should be balanced by tax evasion from some other source.
One possible solution, I think, will to be preach various alliances: G-20, EU, BRICS etc. to join and amend their environment and climate related laws. They can cut the service tax on cable communications (as it is now a necessity) and start collecting the equivalent money from private industries. In this way, a revenue-neutral carbon tax. However, this is my opinion. Other smart options can also be tried.
I am pretty sure that before 2100 we will convert our 80% of fuel dependency into renewable source of dependency. But the point is that how fast can we bring this change. We have to unite together to
be able to see the change in our generation only. The subjects like Machine learning, AI, IoT are
already complementing the move by doing their part. All eyes are actually on the industry and manufacturing sector (which in turn depends on the work by researchers), countries and their laws
and our combined efforts.
" We deem to make our descendants see a changed world, so that they can be proud of us. "
We have millions of articles which focus on the study of History and we have hundreds of documentaries which predict how our future is going to be. But a study on the change of present situations in an explicit manner is what I think is not much focussed upon. The same idea forms the soul of this post and takes the concept of 'carbon tax' as an instance to substantiate my position.
The crux of the story I am going to envisage is the carbon cycle. Yeah, as we mildly remember, analogous to the water cycle, we have a constant transfer of carbon to and from the bottom of the earth. Prior to the industrial era, we relied on the cutting of trees, slaughtering of whales and much more to meet our energy demands. But we 'instantaneously' shifted to the industrial era. That instant shift took centuries to start but merely 2 or 3 centuries to execute. The following 2 graphs say a lot:
As I was explaining about the carbon cycle, the credit for adding something to the carbon cycle goes to the Industrial era. Unfortunately, that something is the 'carbon'. The result is less absorption of carbon by the earth compared to the amount prevailing in our atmosphere. Talking about the direct impact, there is a danger signal to the coastal areas as they are super-sensitive to climate change. In the climate crisis due to obvious reasons, they are going to be the first ones to suffer. And problem elevates as you can see here:
What we pay now today is the commodity that has been borne out of burning fuels. No matter whether it belongs to this company or that country, once the word 'industrial' comes before any product, it should be understood the product is the outcome of industrial revolution. But wait, industrial revolution was also the outcome. Yes, it was. Of the era which saw the heavy killing of animals and forests. The era which was manually written. But since every era has its ending and some era just lasts not long, to un-declare them as era, it's time to move on from fossil fuel era completely to renewable source era.
Back to the point, I was talking about the money which we slog off for day and night. Although money we spend get subsidised by Government in some cases, but a latent equivalent of subsidy is what we are enjoying by virtue of our mute 'mother nature'. A direct analogy of this subsidy can be made with the money which we pay for garbage collection. Since, garbage adds waste product to nature, we pay money so that authorities may recycle them to useful products. Same thing goes with carbon. Industries eject 'carbon' to atmosphere adhering to laws which limits their rate of ejection. But, can't we take carbo-tax from them so that they're forced to use better ways of production and produce less carbon. Although, the argument seems quite literal in a sense. But , the image below is enough to stress the problem :
Thus, it is evitable that this 'garbage' in our atmosphere is really a big subject to worry about. The idea of Carbon tax also seems quite reasonable. But, 'change' and 'success' are two amazing words that have miles of gap between them.
If we think to wait, there are two extreme results that can follow:
As scientists predict worst case to be more probable, waiting means getting screwed up.
Hence, a neutral carbon tax is the term getting preached by most climate think tanks. 'Neutral' means that tax extracted from carbon expulsion should be balanced by tax evasion from some other source.
One possible solution, I think, will to be preach various alliances: G-20, EU, BRICS etc. to join and amend their environment and climate related laws. They can cut the service tax on cable communications (as it is now a necessity) and start collecting the equivalent money from private industries. In this way, a revenue-neutral carbon tax. However, this is my opinion. Other smart options can also be tried.
I am pretty sure that before 2100 we will convert our 80% of fuel dependency into renewable source of dependency. But the point is that how fast can we bring this change. We have to unite together to
be able to see the change in our generation only. The subjects like Machine learning, AI, IoT are
already complementing the move by doing their part. All eyes are actually on the industry and manufacturing sector (which in turn depends on the work by researchers), countries and their laws
and our combined efforts.
" We deem to make our descendants see a changed world, so that they can be proud of us. "
No comments:
Post a Comment