In “Leaders need to be more upfront about the costs of saving the planet” (Opinion, November 2) Megan Greene is absolutely right to insist that the cost of policies to decarbonise are clearly explained.
This echoes Jagjit Chadha’s letter “Think of investment in net zero as the planet’s running costs” (October 22). They both stress the costs to the government but need also to stress that the carbon tax revenues will be available to supplement the inevitable private investment in new technologies and to finance the transfers necessary to cushion those worst affected.
Furthermore it needs to be emphasised that such policies are aimed at reaping the benefits of limiting the damage and dislocation that climate change will otherwise inflict.
It is a complicated process to weigh the costs and benefits of action in this area but it is increasingly clear that urgent action is needed, as Tim Harford has noted (“The climate won’t wait. It’s time for a carbon tax”, Undercover Economist, Spectrum, October 30).
Together with a succession of recent articles by Martin Wolf, it has been impressive to see the Financial Times campaigning so urgently on the climate issues as the negotiators get down to their critical discussions in Glasgow.
Now is the time to stress the overwhelming economic arguments for action.
Andrew Dean
Economist, OECD, 1979-2014
Paris, France
Letter: Making a case for climate action is about economics - Financial Times
Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment