Jerry Taylor, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, published a pithy criticism in last week's Financial Post of T. Boone Pickens' plan to get wind subsidies and other favors from Congress; said Taylor: "Virtually every claim made by T. Boone Pickens to justify the lavish subsidies he is seeking for his wind energy investments is flat wrong."
Jerry also had a few interesting things to say about about carbon taxes:
Fourth, if reducing our carbon footprint is the goal, then the most direct and efficient means of reducing that footprint is to impose a tax on carbon emissions and then leave it to the market to sort out how to most efficiently order affairs under those new prices. Maybe it will mean windmills and CNG [compressed natural gas], but maybe not. Perhaps it will mean more nuclear power, new hydrogen-powered fuel cells, "clean" coal, the emergence of cellulosic ethanol, battery-powered cars or hybrids -- or a continuation of the existing energy base but less consumption as a consequence.
(emphasis added)
I agree with Jerry, but note that Jerry he has not explicitly accepted that reducing our carbon footprint SHOULD be a goal. Rather, he has simply concluded that, should such a goal be adopted, that carbon taxes are the best policy tool. And that might be as much as we can expect, from the time being, from a long-time advocate of limited government such as Jerry.
Jerry Taylor joins Ron Bailey (Reason), George Will, AEI and a long list of others in favoring carbon taxes over any other AGW-directed policies.