It's just all part of the 'green wash' that the major three UK political parties have undergone in the past few years. We do need a way of promoting a sustainable lifestyle, but I do agree - what we don't need are further tax burdens aimed vaguely at green issues.

I've lobbied in the past to get housing associations to be the exemplar for sustainable social housing, to set the standards to which the private firms can only look at in awe. It seems however that the housing associations are not incentivised by these things... how easy it would be for central government to fund and promote this approach. It would show immediate benefits and start showing the private housing industry where they need to be going. There is one proposal going forward in the Newbury area, but you get the feeling that the recently green washed local councilors just don't have a clue about sustainable communities.

So Gordon Brown, cut the spin on green taxes, as green they are not; and start investing now.

Why do it indirectly by TEQs? Why not go direct to universal personal carbon quota (or ration), which can be traded?

Is'nt that what Defra are talking about in the Energy White Paper - Personal Carbon Allowance

I think we should all be working towards a carbon target that gets tougher year by year. That way, when it actually happens it will not be such a shock to the wallet ....aka Green Tax

Ok it was DTI not Defra, but here's the extract

Meeting the Energy Challenge
A White Paper on Energy
May 2007
(DTI)

Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry
By Command of Her Majesty
May 2007

Extract -

BOX 2.4 PERSONAL CARBON ALLOWANCES
The concept of a personal carbon allowance is one of a number of
potential long-term ideas undergoing academic research in the UK. Under
such a scheme, individuals would manage their own carbon emissions; a
national emissions cap would be set, and emissions rights (in the form of
carbon credits) would be allocated across the population as a whole.
Individuals would surrender their carbon credits upon the purchase of, for
example, electricity, gas or transport fuel. Those who need or want to emit
more than their allowance would have to buy allowances from those who
emit less. Over time, the overall emissions cap (and hence individual
allocations) could be reduced in line with international or nationally
adopted agreements.
Following the Energy Review Report, the Government commissioned an
initial scoping study from the Centre for Sustainable Energy into the
feasibility of using personal carbon allowances. Their main findings were
that:
• by having an overall cap on carbon, a personal carbon allowance could
guarantee a certain reduction in domestic carbon emissions;
• it is unlikely that such an allowance could work in isolation from other
policies;
• such a scheme might have the potential to achieve emissions savings in
a fairer way than a carbon tax; and
• there is little evidence currently available about key wider issues critical
to the success of a personal carbon allowance such as public and
political feasibility, technical feasibility, cost, and relative effectiveness.
The Government believes that the current system of taxation strikes the
right balance between protecting the environment, protecting the most
vulnerable in society and maintaining sound public finances. There remain
many high-level questions about whether a personal carbon allowance
scheme could be proportionate, effective, socially equitable and financially
viable, particularly when compared or combined with existing policies and
other options for controlling carbon emissions; whether it could be a
practical and feasible option; how such a scheme might work in practice;
and whether it would avoid placing undue burdens on individuals. The
Government is therefore undertaking a programme of work intending to
look into these issues in more detail.

Hope that clarifies it

"The Government is therefore undertaking a programme of work intending to look into these issues in more detail." i.e. they have dumped the idea in some civil servants in-tray where it is now gathering dust, or am I being too cynical?

the real issue is sustainable growth and developement and the fact that the direction that humanity is taking at the moment is totaly out of balance for our future survival.

The answer is a balanced holistic approach that honestly addresses the issues and developes long term solutions.

green taxes are the stick, but they are a meaningless propoganda green wash if there is not the provision forl ong term reforms and the action and finacial support that this requires.

transition to a low carbon, low energy society. Nothing else will work.


The real key goal is the transition to long term, sustainable growth, not low carbon economy. Burning wood for heating releases co2,but is balanced from the co2 it took in from growth. but this runs against the zero carbon policy.

the international energy authority has just announced that we have now passed peak oil. the price of oil is about to go through the roof 200usd +

I think the zero carbon concept accepts the carbon neutral status of burning wood from sustainable sources but suggests it is done in CHP plants with CCS technology fitted so it acts as a net carbon sink.

When you say "sustainable growth" Bot, are you talking about in the West or in the less developed world? I don't see much scope for growth with declining total energy supplies and I think the wealth is heading East so in my view, we are looking at tightening our belts.

I agree with you about oil prices but part of the increase will have more to do with the decline in the dollar verses other currencies (just breached a 40 year low) and against real money i.e. gold and silver. Never the less, oil prices will be heading a lot higher in whatever currency you want to measure it and production of conventional oil does seem to have peaked in 2005.