Tesla CEO Calls for Carbon Tax

Much as I like EVs, I think they need to win fairly and not through lawyers and legal tricks. Artificially inflating the cost of gas cars isn't going to fool anyone and it may cause such an uproar (particularly now) that it will end EVs for good. Electric car prices need to be brought down from the $40k's through legitimate innovation like metal lithium batteries rather people stealing money from their neighbors through bogus tax hikes.

I can see diverting tax subsidies from big oil to EV rebates. That makes sense since the silly subsidies are already there. However, taking from the gas-driving family that can't afford a new car and maybe not even their home mortgage is not right.

tterbo: the trouble with not having an emissions tax is that the gas-driving family down the street (and everyone else, myself included) is spending our environmental capital without accountability. Most people won't care about the crap they dump into our common air tank unless it affects their bottom line. Higher polluting cars currently have an unfair advantage in the marketplace because the real costs of their use are not directly billed to the manufacturer or end user.

I think a carbon tax is reasonable in theory but very difficult to implement. The CO2 emitted by my Zing depends upon where I charge it and whether I choose to drive it on gas or grid power. In Georgia, (a very high coal use state) it works out about the same either way. In New Hampshire, charging from the grid would be far better than running it on gasoline. In North Dakota, (the highest coal usage state) it causes less CO2 emissions if I run it on gasoline.

If the taxation is federal, then it seems that a grid average lbs/kWh figure should be used. People who live in states like NH or who have rooftop solar cells would complain, however. Very difficult to come up with something that everyone would think is fair.

There is a much more sell-able approach to this: simply make drivers pay for the cost of obtaining their gas. This would include: first and foremost the military budget for obtaining the world's oil - pay for with a gas tax surcharge; elimination of all direct and indirect subsidies including special tax treatments - oh, and while we are at it, the maintenance of the interstate highway system - and leases of government lands at below market values, etc, ad naseum.

The military budget would have to include the full cost of caring for those who fight (and survive) to put gas in our tanks as well as the victims of the collateral damage from the War on Terror (or whatever it is called now).

According to Musk, Tesla was "saved by Daimler," and not by loans from the Department of Energy.

I have to admit I am a fan of Tesla but I have a problem with that statement. I don't know why companies always have a problem admitting the government helped them out. Daimler brought $80 mil to the company, the DOE brought $465 mil not to mention money given to suppliers, including Daimler Chrysler, researchers, infrastructure, and so on.

Well I hope this doesn't become a sign of the future in which this company forgets where it came from.

The best place for a carbon tax is right at the source. The coal mine, the oil rig, the incoming tanker, the extracted fracturing gas. No need to go further down the chain. If you tax it right at the source there is no single end user that can escape. The effect on the electricity grid would be a rush away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy. Suddenly, hydro projects, wind parks, geothermal, solar, biomass generation would become profitable because there is no carbon tax on those renewable energies. Today with free pollution, we are in exactly the opposite situation and we sustain major fossil polluters.
On Tesla side, I am surprised they are involved with Daimler since that company slashed the Swatch car as it was intended to be an electric by its creator. Daimler is also controlled by Deutsche Bank which is controlled by the Saudis. Lots of questions there indeed. The theory of a showroom EV to avoid real market breakthrough gets suddenly more credit with this Daimler presence at Tesla. Not a good thing at all, it is better to have them out of the company as soon as possible.

"The best place for a carbon tax is right at the source. The coal mine, the oil rig, the incoming tanker, the extracted fracturing gas. No need to go further down the chain. If you tax it right at the source there is no single end user that can escape."

Well put Prius Maniac

I heard a great idea to do just .
Start at the source as it hits port or comes in a pipeline from Canada.
Make it small at first, $1.00 per ton of CO2, crank it up over time to adjust to CO2 production.

The KEY would be to not give it to EV drivers or solar start ups directly.
The KEY would be to give to the American consumer: divide all that income by 300 million and we all get a check thanks to the FF companies.

Take ALL the revenue and hand it back to each citizen.
Of course the gas oil coal FF companies will pass along the cost to the consumer but that is OK. As any price increase would be offset by a nice quarterly check the government gives to each citizen. Moreover as the price goes up and up Hummer sales go down and down and EV sales would go UP UP UP

Thus wind solar geothermal BioMass (my local favorite) options look better and better to Utilities Municipalities Homeowners.

Carbon capture startups would get a LOT more funding if coal plants knew they could capture and safely store carbon and avoid the tax.

Keep it simple Stupid

In case anyone didn't notice "gorr" is a well known nut job who usually trolls over at Autobloggreen.