精品国产_亚洲人成在线高清,国产精品成人久久久久,国语自产偷拍精品视频偷拍

在2015年的巴黎氣候大會上，美國政府承諾到2025年前，其溫室氣體排放量要在2005年的基礎上下降26%至28%。雖然特朗普政府一直放話說要退出《巴黎協定》，但現階段該協定仍是美國政府制訂一切氣候計劃的標準。

不過這也僅僅是個開始而已。研究表明，就算各國都達到了他們在巴黎峰會上的承諾，要達到本世紀內將平均氣溫增幅控制在2攝氏度以內的目標，各國非得進一步削減碳排放才行。因此，美國氣候政策的目標應該比《巴黎協定》更加嚴格才是。

我們認為，要想達到這個目標，美國前國務卿詹姆斯·貝克與喬治·舒爾茨聯合提出的方案或許是最具有政治可行性的。他們的方案是對所有碳排放逐漸加征費用，這筆錢最終會被返還給全體美國人民。這樣的話，一個四口之家，每年大約會分到2000美元的“碳紅利”。

根據他們的方案，每噸碳的“排放費”是40美元。貝克和舒爾茨的“碳紅利”計劃，或許也是當今各主要碳排放國提出的最雄心勃勃的收費計劃了。

美國氣候領導委員會近期發布了一篇題為《超越巴黎協定》的報告，這篇報告量化了可以合理預期的減排目標。該報告的序言由美國前國務卿喬治·舒爾茨、前財政部長勞倫斯·薩默斯、前環保署署長克里斯汀·托德·惠特曼、前沃爾瑪董事長羅布·沃頓以及我們兩人共同撰寫。

根據氣候領導委員會的分析，如果奧巴馬時代的所有氣候法規都保持不變，到2025年，美國的溫室氣體排放量將減少大約18%。相比之下，如果“貝克-舒爾茨計劃”得以實施，那么到2025年，美國將實現大約32%的減排，從而大大超過美國在巴黎峰會上的承諾。

非盈利組織“未來資源”（Resources for the Future）根據“貝克-舒爾茨計劃”，基于2021年至2035年間征稅碳排放稅的假設，對該計劃進行了數學建模，并按并按3%到6%的年通脹率水平進行調整后。該模型發現，按照該計劃，到2035年，美國與能源相關的二氧化碳排放量將比2005年下降41%到47%，從而大大提高了美國的環保水平。

很顯然，貝爾和舒爾茨的“碳紅利”計劃是一項極為野心勃勃的氣候解決方案。它在政治上也是最可行的，因為它解決了所有主要利益相關方的合理關切，并使各方都能實現重要勝利。

這個方案的基本理念已經獲得了許多行業的重量級企業領袖的支持，包括?？松梨凇づ?、AECOM、安聯、AT&T、Exelon、First Solar、通用汽車、強生、大都會人壽、寶潔、百事可樂、桑坦德、施耐德電氣和聯合利華等等。這些公司也都是美國氣候領導委員會的創始成員。

“貝克-舒爾茨計劃”也得到了環保組織和各個政治派別的意見領袖的支持。這還是美國歷史上，各方面首次廣泛地聯合起來，支持一個具體的全國性的氣候解決方案，而且支持它的人還越來越多。

該計劃之所以具有廣泛吸引力，是因為它基于各方的妥協，特別是通過繳納高額且不斷上漲的費用來讓政府減緩監管壓力，因而這種提議同時打動了環保人士、企業和保守派。更重要的是，它將所有“碳紅利”直接惠及全體美國人民。這樣一來，普通美國人既幫助解決了氣候變化挑戰，也享受了經濟上的利益。

而各方之所以能達成這樣的妥協，也因為該方案的核心目的仍然是環保，從而使得該方案的其他部分具有了政治可行性。正因為它在減排上是有效的，所以足以取代其他更具侵略性的減排方案。這一點對企業來說是很有吸引力的。在所有經濟學家看來，基于市場的碳排放稅也是最具成本效益的解決方案。

了確保達到預期減排目標，“貝克-舒爾茨計劃”可能還需要一種環境保障機制。根據該機制，如果關鍵的減排標準沒有達到，企業需上繳的碳排放費將增長得更快。同時，為了保護美國企業的國際競爭力，它還應該包含一個邊境地區的碳排放調整機制。

這項計劃受到的歡迎也進一步提高了它的可行性。根據Hill+Knowlton公司進行的一項全國調查顯示，美國民眾支持與反對該計劃的比例達到了2:1，該計劃在共和黨中也有23%的支持率。在“千禧一代”（他們馬上將成為美國最大的選民群體），支持與反對的比例更是超過了4:1。

這些都表明，“貝克-舒爾茨計劃”已漸漸成為一項美國社會的共識，反映了美國的政界還是理智的。它還表明，美國要想超過在巴黎峰會上的承諾，保持在氣候議題上的全球領袖地位，是有一條現實的路可以走的。（財富中文網）

本文作者珍妮特·耶倫曾任美聯儲主席；泰德·哈希蒂現為美國氣候領導委員會主席兼CEO。

譯者：樸成奎

At the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, the United States committed to reduce its net greenhouse gas emissions by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2025. Even though the Trump administration has announced its intention to withdraw from the Paris agreement, it remains the benchmark by which any U.S. climate plan is judged.

But it is only a starting point. Even if all nations meet their Paris commitments, the best studies indicate that far greater emissions reductions will be necessary for the world to maintain global temperatures below the agreed-upon 2 degrees Celsius threshold. The goal of U.S. climate policy should therefore be to exceed Paris.

We believe the most politically viable way to accomplish this is a plan co-authored by former Republican Secretaries of State James Baker and George Shultz. The Baker-Shultz plan is based on a gradually rising fee applied to all carbon emissions, with all the revenue rebated directly to the American people. A family of four would receive approximately $2,000 per year in “carbon dividends.”

The Baker-Shultz Carbon Dividends plan—starting with a carbon fee of $40 per ton—would be the most ambitious carbon price enacted by any major emitter nation.

A report entitled Exceeding Paris, released recently by the Climate Leadership Council, quantifies the emissions reductions that could reasonably be expected. Its foreword is co-authored by former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman, and former Walmart Chairman Rob Walton, as well as the two of us.

All Obama-era climate regulations, had they remained in place, would have achieved approximately 18% in greenhouse gas reductions by 2025, according to the council’s analysis. In comparison, the Baker-Shultz plan would achieve an approximately 32% reduction by 2025, thereby exceeding our Paris commitment by a wide margin.

As also discussed in our report, the nonprofit research organization Resources for the Future modeled the Baker-Shultz plan through 2035 based on a carbon tax starting in 2021 and a range of inflation-adjusted annual escalation rates from 3% to 6%. It found that U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions would decline to a level of 41% to 47% below 2005 levels by 2035, also raising the environmental bar substantially.

It’s clear that the Baker-Shultz Carbon Dividends Plan is the most environmentally ambitious climate solution. It’s also the most politically viable because it addresses the legitimate concerns of all key stakeholders in the climate debate and enables each to realize an important victory.

A broad coalition of business sector leaders supports the general outlines of the plan. Among them: BP, ExxonMobil, Shell, and Total, as well as AECOM, Allianz, AT&T, Exelon, First Solar, General Motors, Johnson & Johnson, Metlife, Procter & Gamble, PepsiCo, Santander, Schneider Electric, and Unilever. Each is a founding member of the Climate Leadership Council.

The Baker-Shultz framework also enjoys support from environmental organizations and opinion leaders from across the political spectrum. This is the broadest coalition in U.S. history to come together in support of a concrete federal climate solution, and it continues to grow.

The plan’s broad appeal is based on a series of grand bargains, including trading a robust and rising carbon price for regulatory relief, thereby appealing to environmentalists, businesses, and conservatives at the same time. Just as important, it appeals to the American people by rebating all of the revenue raised directly to them in an equal per capita amount. This would allow the majority of American families to economically benefit from helping solve climate change.

At the heart of this grand bargain is the environmental ambition of the Baker-Shultz plan, which unlocks the political viability of its other components. Its effectiveness in reducing emissions justifies the phase-out of other carbon regulations that are far more intrusive. This provides a major draw for businesses. The plan’s reliance on a market-based carbon tax also makes it—in the view of economists of all stripes—the most cost-effective solution.

To ensure that intended emissions reductions are met, the Baker-Shultz plan may include an environmental assurance mechanism under which the carbon fee would increase faster if key emissions reductions benchmarks are not met. And to protect the international competitiveness of American firms, it includes a border carbon adjustment.

The plan’s popularity enhances its viability. A national poll by Hill+Knowlton, released in full today, finds that the American public supports the Baker-Shultz plan by a 2-1 margin, and by a 23-point margin among Republicans. Among millennials—soon to be the largest voting cohort—support exceeds 4-1.

All of this suggests that the Baker-Shultz plan is emerging as a consensus national climate solution, reflecting the sensible center of American politics. It also demonstrates that there is a realistic path for the United States to exceed its Paris climate commitment and restore its position as a global climate leader.

Janet L. Yellen is the former Chair of the Federal Reserve. Ted Halstead is Chairman & CEO of the Climate Leadership Council.