A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies (Hardcover)

~ Prof. William D. Nordhaus (Author)
Key Phrases: optimal carbon price, optimal carbon tax, consumption elasticity, Stern Review, Kyoto Protocol, United States (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"William Nordhaus has, with the publication of A Question of Balance, once again reestablished the gold standard for economic analysis of climate policy in an uncertain world where scientific understanding changes unexpectedly."-Gary Yohe, Woodhouse/Sysco Professor of Economics at Wesleyan University (Gary Yohe )

"This book provides a forceful, insightful, and timely overview of climate change policy. Professor Nordhaus adroitly unravels the mysteries of global warming and lays bare the options before us."­-John P. Weyant, Professor of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University (John P. Weyant )

"Nordhaus''s careful modeling of the world climate and the world economy is a cool breeze of common sense in an arena of discourse often dominated by torrents of hot air."-Dale Jorgenson, Samuel W. Morris University Professor of Economics, Harvard University (Dale Jorgenson )

"Professor Nordhaus pioneered the integrated analysis of climate change, combining climatic and economic modeling. His new book shows that his work remains the standard of analysis by which the field may be judged. His exposition is very clear and thorough, showing all the relevant issues so that those who may disagree can pinpoint exactly the points at issue."-Kenneth J. Arrow, Stanford University, Nobel Laureate in Economics (Kenneth J. Arrow )

Product Description

As scientific and observational evidence on global warming piles up every day, questions of economic policy in this central environmental topic have taken center stage. But as author and prominent Yale economist William Nordhaus observes, the issues involved in understanding global warming and slowing its harmful effects are complex and cross disciplinary boundaries. For example, ecologists see global warming as a threat to ecosystems, utilities as a debit to their balance sheets, and farmers as a hazard to their livelihoods.

 

In this important work, William Nordhaus integrates the entire spectrum of economic and scientific research to weigh the costs of reducing emissions against the benefits of reducing the long-run damages from global warming. The book offers one of the most extensive analyses of the economic and environmental dynamics of greenhouse-gas emissions and climate change and provides the tools to evaluate alternative approaches to slowing global warming. The author emphasizes the need to establish effective mechanisms, such as carbon taxes, to harness markets and harmonize the efforts of different countries. This book not only will shape discussion of one the world’s most pressing problems but will provide the rationales and methods for achieving widespread agreement on our next best move in alleviating global warming.

See all Editorial Reviews

---

Product Details Hardcover: 256 pages Publisher: Yale University Press; illustrated edition edition (June 24, 2008) Language: English ISBN-10: 0300137486 ISBN-13: 978-0300137484 Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.5 x 1 inches Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies) Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews) Amazon.com Sales Rank: #204,631 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books) Popular in these categories: (What's this?) #64 in  Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Climatology > Climate Changes #83 in  Books > Outdoors & Nature > Conservation > Environmentalism

---

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

› Visit Amazon's William D. Nordhaus Page

Front Cover | Table of Contents | First Pages | Index | Surprise Me!

Search Inside This Book:

---

Inside This Book (learn more)

Key Phrases - Statistically Improbable Phrases (SIPs): (learn more)
optimal carbon price, optimal carbon tax, consumption elasticity, time discount rate, climatic damages, backstop technology, incomplete participation, carbon prices, negative risk premium, climate damages, global temperature increase, mean temperature increase, integrated assessment models, pure rate, carbon taxes

Key Phrases - Capitalized Phrases (CAPs): (learn more)
Stern Review, Kyoto Protocol, United States, Climate-Change Policy, Model Runs, The Many Advantages of Carbon Taxes, Fourth Assessment Report, The Economics of Participation, European Union, United Nations Framework Convention

Browse Sample Pages:
Front Cover | Table of Contents | First Pages | Index | Surprise Me!

Search Inside This Book:

---

What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?

	90% buy the item featured on this page: A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policies 3.5 out of 5 stars (2) $21.84
	4% buy The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review 2.5 out of 5 stars (2) $40.82
	2% buy Global Warming and the World Trading System $20.47
	2% buy Architectures for Agreement: Addressing Global Climate Change in the Post-Kyoto World 5.0 out of 5 stars (1) $26.74

Explore similar items

---

Tags Customers Associate with This Product  (What's this?) Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people. Check the boxes next to the tags you consider relevant or enter your own tags in the field below.  global warming(3) energy(2) environmentalis m(2) taxes(2) economics(1) Your tags: Add your first tag

Search Products Tagged with   See most popular tags

---

Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store

If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store. Learn more

---

 

Customer Reviews

2 Reviews 5 star:  (1) 4 star:    (0) 3 star:    (0) 2 star:  (1) 1 star:    (0)           Average Customer Review 3.5 out of 5 stars (2 customer reviews)		Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most Helpful Customer Reviews 17 of 18 people found the following review helpful: 5.0 out of 5 stars Essential evaluation of the economics of ameliorating global warming, June 29, 2008 By  H. Mccartor (Portland, Oregon) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)    The author accepts global warming as a given and a very serious problem. He considers what we can do about it at what cost. His approach is to create a computer model in which he hopes to capture the salient economic, energy and climate factors while being simple enough that it can be understood and run repeatedly with different scenarios. I am not an economist and and the equations and their import were often beyond my understanding. I relied on Professor Nordehaus's academic standing (Stirling Professor of Economics at Yale and coauthor of a standard economics text with Paul Samuelson) and took him to be fair in his assessments. I thought he was thorough is his descriptions of the limitations of this approach and his model which I would describe as an economic and cost benefit analysis over time of various strategies for ameliorating global warming. To understand his model you must understand how future losses from climate change are "discounted" by economists. Freeman Dyson explains this as follows "the value of one dollar invested at an average interest rate of 4 percent for a period of one hundred years would be fifty-four dollars ... therefore, for every dollar spent now on a particular strategy to fight global warming, the investment must reduce the damage caused by warming by an amount that exceeds fifty-four dollars in one hundred years' time to accrue a positive economic benefit to society." Nordhaus runs his model under eight varying assumptions and or goals so that they can be compared 100 and 200 years out. 1) captures the cost of doing nothing to which the others can be compared. 2) is an optimal policy economically without constraints of eventual temperature or CO2 increase. It only spends on abatement when in costs less than doing nothing. 3) constrains allowable CO2 to 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 times the pre-industrial level in separate runs. 4) constrains the eventual temperature increase to 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 degrees C. in separate runs. 5) runs several variants of the Kyoto agreement, with and without the US and with an improved treaty. 6) evaluates the Stern review proposal (early major carbon reduction). 7) evaluates the Gore proposal (early stringent carbon reduction). 8) evaluates the result of finding a cheap non-carbon energy source for all energy needs. For the results let me quote Nordhaus: "The net present-value global benefit of the optimal policy is $3 trillion relative to no controls. This total involves $2 trillion of abatement costs and $5 trillion of reduction climate damages. Note that even after the optimal policy has been taken, there will still be substantial residual damages from climate change, which we estimate to be $17 trillion More of the climate damages are not eliminated because the additional abatement would cost more than the additional reduction in damages." Note that less than 25% of the economic damage is prevented because it is not cost effective in the "optimal" policy to prevent the rest and thus global temperature increases 2.7 C. (about 5 F.) by 2100. There is also large scale damage for which a dollar amount cannot be assigned and is thus omitted from the model. This includes loss of species, discomfort of higher temperatures, displacement of human, animal and plant populations, shifting weather patterns etc. Limiting atmospheric CO2 to two times pre-industrial levels or limiting the temperature increase to 2.5 C. produce very similar results to the "optimal" policy. Limiting CO2 to 1.5 times pre-industrial or temperature to 1.5 C. has a net loss of $14 trillion (damages plus abatement costs) over doing nothing. The Gore proposal produces similar results but costs $21 trillion. The Kyoto proposal results where almost identical to doing nothing! The model also computes an optimal carbon tax for each strategy which because of the discounting needs to increase gradually over time. For the "optimal" strategy the carbon tax would be $27 per ton initially, $90 per ton in 2050 and $200 per ton in 2100. Note that because CO2 is 3.2 times as heavy as carbon if you tax CO2 the rate would be 3.2 times lower or just over $8 initially. Nordhaus also discusses the advantages of a carbon tax over a cap and trade approach. These results surprised me. I had assumed that the Kyoto Agreement approach, although flawed, could be good if modified and joined by the US and that the Gore approach would be even better. I was annoyed by those who proposed putting the major carbon restrictions off to the future which seemed to push the problem onto our children. I though a cap and trade approach would be superior to a carbon tax since if guaranteed specific reductions. What makes this such an important book from my point of view is that I found myself to be so frequently wrong. The approaches I had favored turned out to be either relatively ineffective, much more expensive or both. This is not a book for those who do not want their current conceptions challenged. Findings I found important include: 1) A moderate carbon tax with gradual increase is much more cost effective in achieving the SAME GOAL as a stiff initial tax. This was by far the most surprising to me. 2) total participation is much much more efficient that partial whether it is nations or industries. 3) A carbon tax has several important advantages over a cap and trade system. 4) The cost of the various approaches varies dramatically in ways I would not have predicted. 5) There is a huge gain in finding alternative energy sources early in the game making research a top priority deserving large public investment. This is a book about economic tradeoffs - a question of balance. The author is clear that these models do not capture esthetic, moral, species extinction, stewardship and other concerns which policy makers must address. For instance, the "optimal" economic approach leaves our great grandchildren in a world 5 degrees warmer, with many fewer species, and major environmental shifts. I myself would probably opt for a less economically "optimal" approach that preserved more of the world as I know it and takes fewer risks about possible positive feedback loops leading to an escalating and uncontrollable heat gain. We can make these political decisions more rationally when we can estimate the costs of alternatives. Other things being equal, we would like to arrive at a chosen result at the least cost. I believe that professor Nordhaus's continuing work is a major advance toward helping us achieve that goal. It is important to remember that this is a simplified model for which the inputs are often best guesses and that some crucial unknown features may turn out to have been omitted. I expect the model will improve over time as more data is accumulated. If you do not wish to buy the book I think most of the material can be found and the author's website (Google: William Nordhaus). Again I think this is a very important book and I consider it a must for those setting global warming amelioration policy. 2 of 12 people found the following review helpful: 2.0 out of 5 stars Misguided plea for another tax on energy, October 31, 2008 By  William Podmore (London United Kingdom) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)    William Nordhaus, Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University, urges a global carbon tax to cut carbon emissions. He admits, "on the side of climate damages, our knowledge is very meagre." Yet he then writes that his `best guess' is that climate damage will cost 2.5% of world output per year by 2100, if emissions are not cut. But the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that with the forecast 3oC increase, "Globally, the potential for food production is projected to increase." What could be more important than increasing food production? Nordhaus rightly attacks three recent proposals: the Stern Review's proposal, backed by the Brown government, of an 85% global cut in emissions by 2050, Al Gore's proposed 90% cut in US emissions by 2050, and the German government's proposal to cut global emissions to 50% of 1990's levels by 2050. Nordhaus points out that all three proposals would cause great damage, because they would all cost huge amounts in the short term, about $17-22 trillion each. Nordhaus also attacks the Kyoto Protocol as too dear. Its adherents hurt themselves by adding to their production costs. He admits that a stronger Kyoto "would involve strenuous efforts virtually without precedent among international agreements." But so would the global carbon tax that he proposes. If every nation imposed the tax, it would cost $2 trillion. He says that this tax should be $27 per ton of carbon at first. In the USA, this would add 9 cents to the price of a gallon of petrol and 10% to the price of coal-generated electricity. The total US tax take would be $50 billion a year. He wants the tax to rise to $90 per ton by 2050 and to $200 by 2100. But any country fool enough to impose this tax would force its energy-using industries abroad to some country that didn't impose the tax. So the tax wouldn't cut global emissions, but it would cut living standards in countries that imposed it.		Ad feedback   Search Customer Reviews Only search this product's reviews

---

Customer Discussions

This product's forum Discussion Replies Latest Post No discussions yet Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight Start a new discussion Topic: First post: Receive e-mail when new posts are made Prompts for sign-in   Guidelines Active discussions in related forums Discussion Replies Latest Post politics Berlin Wall fell 20 years ago...but so what? 71 3 minutes ago politics Ambassador Karl Eikenberry is against sending extra troops, has warned Mr Obama about Afghan President Hamid Karzai's erratic behaviour and corruption in the government. 0 15 minutes ago science Why are cretionists allowed in the science Section? 15 1 hour ago science Are forum Darwinists really just a branch of ACORN? 161 1 hour ago global warming Why is the issue of global warming so politically divisive? 168 3 hours ago global warming Positive reviews for Green Power 0 15 hours ago textbook Textbooks for Kindle DX? 61 4 days ago Search Customer Discussions Search all Amazon discussions

The Global Warming community Latest activity 9 hours ago 2,518 customers have contributed 1,129 products, 42 discussions and more... › Explore the community The Environmentalism community Latest activity 2 hours ago 4,874 customers have contributed 3,119 products, 460 lists & guides and more... › Explore the community The Energy community Latest activity 7 hours ago 2,623 customers have contributed 1,687 products, 173 lists & guides and more... › Explore the community Related forums energy (2 discussions) environmenta... (15 discussions) global warming (42 discussions) politics (1023 discussions) science (1023 discussions) tax textbook (18 discussions) Explore more › See all Customer Communities › Your communities

---

Listmania!

Some of the most controversial books on Global Warming/Climate change: A list by Emc2   Global Warming: Top 15 books on the latest real science (apolitical): A list by Emc2   Global warming Books: A list by Media Visions Press Create a Listmania! list

Search Listmania!

---

So You'd Like to...

Stop Global Warming Now !!!: A guide by Stanley Create a guide

Search Guides

---

Product Information from the Amapedia Community

Beta (What's this?)

Be the first person to add an article about this item at Amapedia.com.

› See featured Amapedia.com articles

---

Look for Similar Items by Category

• Books > Business & Investing > Economics > Natural Resources
• Books > Business & Investing > Popular Economics
• Books > Nonfiction > Politics
• Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Public Policy
• Books > Outdoors & Nature > Conservation > Environmentalism
• Books > Outdoors & Nature > Environment > Conservation
• Books > Outdoors & Nature > Environment > Weather
• Books > Professional & Technical > Engineering > Civil > Environmental
• Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Climatology
• Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Meteorology
• Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Rivers

---

Look for Similar Items by Subject

Search Books by subject:
Environmental monitoring
Environmentalist thought & ideology
Climate Changes
Environmental Policy
Political Science
Business / Economics / Finance
Nature
Politics/International Relations
Business & Economics / General
Environmental Conservation & Protection - General
General
Nature / Environmental Conservation & Protection
Earth Sciences - Meteorology & Climatology
Environmental Economics
Public Policy - Environmental Policy
Climatic changes
Economic aspects
Global warming
Environment & Planning


i.e., each book must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND ...

Ad feedback

 

Feedback If you need help or have a question for Customer Service, contact us.  Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? Is there any other feedback you would like to provide? Your comments can help make our site better for everyone. Please note that we are unable to respond directly to all feedback submitted via this form, but we'll ask you to sign in so we can contact you if needed.

Your Recent History

 (What's this?)

After viewing product detail pages or search results, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in.

› View and edit your browsing history

Get to Know Us Careers Investor Relations Press Releases Amazon and Our Planet Make Money with Us Sell on Amazon Join Associates Self-publish with Us › See all Let Us Help You Shipping Rates & Policies Amazon Prime Returns Help

Canada | China | France | Germany | Japan | United Kingdom  And don't forget: Amazon Windowshop | AmazonWireless | Askville | Audible | DPReview | Endless | IMDb | Shopbop | SoundUnwound | Warehouse Deals by Amazon | Zappos Conditions of Use | Privacy Notice  © 1996-2009, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates

Product Details

• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: Yale University Press; illustrated edition edition (June 24, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0300137486
• ISBN-13: 978-0300137484
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.5 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #204,631 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #64 in	Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Climatology > Climate Changes
  #83 in	Books > Outdoors & Nature > Conservation > Environmentalism

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Essential evaluation of the economics of ameliorating global warming, June 29, 2008

By	H. Mccartor (Portland, Oregon) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

The author accepts global warming as a given and a very serious problem. He considers what we can do about it at what cost. His approach is to create a computer model in which he hopes to capture the salient economic, energy and climate factors while being simple enough that it can be understood and run repeatedly with different scenarios. I am not an economist and and the equations and their import were often beyond my understanding. I relied on Professor Nordehaus's academic standing (Stirling Professor of Economics at Yale and coauthor of a standard economics text with Paul Samuelson) and took him to be fair in his assessments. I thought he was thorough is his descriptions of the limitations of this approach and his model which I would describe as an economic and cost benefit analysis over time of various strategies for ameliorating global warming.

To understand his model you must understand how future losses from climate change are "discounted" by economists. Freeman Dyson explains this as follows "the value of one dollar invested at an average interest rate of 4 percent for a period of one hundred years would be fifty-four dollars ... therefore, for every dollar spent now on a particular strategy to fight global warming, the investment must reduce the damage caused by warming by an amount that exceeds fifty-four dollars in one hundred years' time to accrue a positive economic benefit to society."

Nordhaus runs his model under eight varying assumptions and or goals so that they can be compared 100 and 200 years out.
1) captures the cost of doing nothing to which the others can be compared.
2) is an optimal policy economically without constraints of eventual temperature or CO2 increase. It only spends on abatement when in costs less than doing nothing.
3) constrains allowable CO2 to 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 times the pre-industrial level in separate runs.
4) constrains the eventual temperature increase to 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 degrees C. in separate runs.
5) runs several variants of the Kyoto agreement, with and without the US and with an improved treaty.
6) evaluates the Stern review proposal (early major carbon reduction).
7) evaluates the Gore proposal (early stringent carbon reduction).
8) evaluates the result of finding a cheap non-carbon energy source for all energy needs.

For the results let me quote Nordhaus: "The net present-value global benefit of the optimal policy is $3 trillion relative to no controls. This total involves $2 trillion of abatement costs and $5 trillion of reduction climate damages. Note that even after the optimal policy has been taken, there will still be substantial residual damages from climate change, which we estimate to be $17 trillion More of the climate damages are not eliminated because the additional abatement would cost more than the additional reduction in damages."

Note that less than 25% of the economic damage is prevented because it is not cost effective in the "optimal" policy to prevent the rest and thus global temperature increases 2.7 C. (about 5 F.) by 2100. There is also large scale damage for which a dollar amount cannot be assigned and is thus omitted from the model. This includes loss of species, discomfort of higher temperatures, displacement of human, animal and plant populations, shifting weather patterns etc.

Limiting atmospheric CO2 to two times pre-industrial levels or limiting the temperature increase to 2.5 C. produce very similar results to the "optimal" policy. Limiting CO2 to 1.5 times pre-industrial or temperature to 1.5 C. has a net loss of $14 trillion (damages plus abatement costs) over doing nothing. The Gore proposal produces similar results but costs $21 trillion. The Kyoto proposal results where almost identical to doing nothing!

The model also computes an optimal carbon tax for each strategy which because of the discounting needs to increase gradually over time. For the "optimal" strategy the carbon tax would be $27 per ton initially, $90 per ton in 2050 and $200 per ton in 2100. Note that because CO2 is 3.2 times as heavy as carbon if you tax CO2 the rate would be 3.2 times lower or just over $8 initially. Nordhaus also discusses the advantages of a carbon tax over a cap and trade approach.

These results surprised me. I had assumed that the Kyoto Agreement approach, although flawed, could be good if modified and joined by the US and that the Gore approach would be even better. I was annoyed by those who proposed putting the major carbon restrictions off to the future which seemed to push the problem onto our children. I though a cap and trade approach would be superior to a carbon tax since if guaranteed specific reductions. What makes this such an important book from my point of view is that I found myself to be so frequently wrong. The approaches I had favored turned out to be either relatively ineffective, much more expensive or both. This is not a book for those who do not want their current conceptions challenged.

Findings I found important include: 1) A moderate carbon tax with gradual increase is much more cost effective in achieving the SAME GOAL as a stiff initial tax. This was by far the most surprising to me. 2) total participation is much much more efficient that partial whether it is nations or industries. 3) A carbon tax has several important advantages over a cap and trade system. 4) The cost of the various approaches varies dramatically in ways I would not have predicted. 5) There is a huge gain in finding alternative energy sources early in the game making research a top priority deserving large public investment.

This is a book about economic tradeoffs - a question of balance. The author is clear that these models do not capture esthetic, moral, species extinction, stewardship and other concerns which policy makers must address. For instance, the "optimal" economic approach leaves our great grandchildren in a world 5 degrees warmer, with many fewer species, and major environmental shifts. I myself would probably opt for a less economically "optimal" approach that preserved more of the world as I know it and takes fewer risks about possible positive feedback loops leading to an escalating and uncontrollable heat gain. We can make these political decisions more rationally when we can estimate the costs of alternatives. Other things being equal, we would like to arrive at a chosen result at the least cost. I believe that professor Nordhaus's continuing work is a major advance toward helping us achieve that goal.

It is important to remember that this is a simplified model for which the inputs are often best guesses and that some crucial unknown features may turn out to have been omitted. I expect the model will improve over time as more data is accumulated.

If you do not wish to buy the book I think most of the material can be found and the author's website (Google: William Nordhaus). Again I think this is a very important book and I consider it a must for those setting global warming amelioration policy.

2 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Misguided plea for another tax on energy, October 31, 2008

By	William Podmore (London United Kingdom) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

William Nordhaus, Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University, urges a global carbon tax to cut carbon emissions.

He admits, "on the side of climate damages, our knowledge is very meagre." Yet he then writes that his `best guess' is that climate damage will cost 2.5% of world output per year by 2100, if emissions are not cut. But the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that with the forecast 3oC increase, "Globally, the potential for food production is projected to increase." What could be more important than increasing food production?

Nordhaus rightly attacks three recent proposals: the Stern Review's proposal, backed by the Brown government, of an 85% global cut in emissions by 2050, Al Gore's proposed 90% cut in US emissions by 2050, and the German government's proposal to cut global emissions to 50% of 1990's levels by 2050. Nordhaus points out that all three proposals would cause great damage, because they would all cost huge amounts in the short term, about $17-22 trillion each.

Nordhaus also attacks the Kyoto Protocol as too dear. Its adherents hurt themselves by adding to their production costs. He admits that a stronger Kyoto "would involve strenuous efforts virtually without precedent among international agreements."

But so would the global carbon tax that he proposes. If every nation imposed the tax, it would cost $2 trillion. He says that this tax should be $27 per ton of carbon at first. In the USA, this would add 9 cents to the price of a gallon of petrol and 10% to the price of coal-generated electricity. The total US tax take would be $50 billion a year. He wants the tax to rise to $90 per ton by 2050 and to $200 by 2100.

But any country fool enough to impose this tax would force its energy-using industries abroad to some country that didn't impose the tax. So the tax wouldn't cut global emissions, but it would cut living standards in countries that imposed it.