• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
Celebrating our 1,000th edition. The climate news you need
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  FEATURED
BREAKING: No Public Finance for East Coast LNG Projects, Wilkinson Says July 4, 2022
‘Climate Math Gets Harder’ as Radicalized Supreme Court Upends U.S. Carbon Regulation July 4, 2022
Dire Living Conditions, Climate-Driven Heat Wave Produce Deadliest Human Smuggling Event in U.S. History July 4, 2022
Ex-Fossil Workers Convert Old Oilfields to Solar Farms After ‘Rapid Upskilling’ in Alberta June 29, 2022
London Becomes Biggest City to Sign Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty June 29, 2022
Next
Prev
Home Climate & Society Energy / Carbon Pricing & Economics

Time to Embrace Supply-Side Campaigns, Keep Fossils in the Ground, New Study Argues

April 5, 2018
Reading time: 3 minutes

Department of Energy/Flickr

Department of Energy/Flickr

 

It’s time to get past a consistent bias shared by analysts, politicians, and pundits across the political spectrum, veteran climate hawk David Roberts writes in a recent column for Vox: the curiously widespread aversion to restricting the supply of fossil fuels and leaving more climate-busting carbon in the ground.

“Policies that choke off fossil fuels at their origin—shutting down mines and wells; banning new ones; opting against new pipelines, refineries, and export terminals—have been embraced by climate activists, picking up steam with the Keystone pipeline protests and the recent direct action of the Valve Turners,” Roberts writes. “But they are looked upon with some disdain by the climate intelligentsia, who are united in their belief that such strategies are economically suboptimal and politically counterproductive.”

But now, economists Fergus Green of the London School of Economics and Richard Denniss of the Australia Institute have come up with what Roberts calls a “cogent argument that the activists are onto something—that restrictive supply-side (RSS) climate policies have unique economic and political benefits and deserve a place alongside carbon prices and renewable energy supports in the climate policy toolkit.”

Roberts opens the discussion by suggesting a two-by-two grid for characterizing that toolkit: supply-side policies that restrict fossil subsidies and supplies or support low-carbon infrastructure, and demand-side measures that price and regulate carbon or support and subsidize renewables and energy efficiency. Green and Denniss point out that the first of the four quadrants—supply-side restrictions on fossil fuel production—are almost always absent from climate policy discussions and analysis.

“On its face, this doesn’t make much sense,” Roberts notes. “In other areas of policy, demand- and supply-side policies are routinely mixed and considered mutually reinforcing.” Green and Denniss note that Australia’s world-acclaimed efforts to control smoking “are a wide-ranging mix of tactics. Supply is restricted through taxes, licencing requirements, and prohibitions on advertising and sponsorships. Demand is restricted through consumption taxes, public education campaigns, and warnings on packs.”

And crucially, successful tobacco control “was not the result of a single, clean instrument, an ‘optimal’ policy, but a portfolio approach. And it isn’t considered a muddle or a redundant mess, but a sensible way to approach a complex problem. And it has worked.”

Green and Denniss argue that RSS policies are easier than carbon prices to administer, cover the weaknesses in “least cost” demand-side policies, can avoid lock-in of new fossil infrastructure, and short-circuit the “green paradox”, in which increasingly stringent carbon prices motivate fossil developers to fast-track their projects while they might still be viable.

But the political benefits of restrictive supply-side policies are just as important, the two authors assert: it’s easier to mobilize public support around supply-side campaigns, RSS can divide fossil companies against each other, and the approach can also boost international cooperation to confront climate change.

Roberts sees the first of those three as the key argument.

“Where demand-side policies typically foreground carbon reductions, the benefits of which are widely spread in time and space, RSS policies target fossil fuel reductions, with a wider range of benefits [like] air and water pollution reductions, health improvements, and punishment for big fossil fuel companies, which are politically unpopular,” he writes. “This broader portfolio of benefits is more likely to mobilize public support.”

Green and Denniss add that supply-side campaigning “enables proposals to be framed in ways that are more resonant with voters and more resilient to counter-attack by opposing interest groups; facilitates alliance-building among diverse groups with wide-ranging concerns about fossil fuels; and facilitates network-building among groups at different advocacy- and policy-relevant scales,” all of which “build political strength for future battles,” Roberts notes.



in Energy / Carbon Pricing & Economics

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Seci/wikimedia commons
Climate Denial & Greenwashing

Saudi Aramco Talks Net-Zero, Plans to Boost Production Through 2035

July 4, 2022
18
David/flickr
United States

U.S. Supreme Court Expected to Gut Emission Controls as Climate Scientists Petition for Plan B

June 26, 2022
1.2k
Graco/Facebook
Food Security

Soaring Fertilizer Prices Could Deliver ‘Silver Lining’ for Emissions, But Farmers Struggle to Limit Use

July 2, 2022
217

Comments 2

  1. Laurie Parkinson says:
    4 years ago

    Great idea! Any ideas how to talk politicians, wed to big oil, into this?

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Wikimedia Commons

BREAKING: No Public Finance for East Coast LNG Projects, Wilkinson Says

July 4, 2022
101
angela n./flickr

‘Climate Math Gets Harder’ as Radicalized Supreme Court Upends U.S. Carbon Regulation

July 4, 2022
98
U.S. Navy/picryl

Montreal to Host New NATO Climate Centre as Military Analyst Confronts Global ‘Hyperthreat’

July 4, 2022
77
opinion polling gender green recovery climate action

Conservative Women Far More Likely Than Men to Support Green Transition, EcoAnalytics Research Finds

July 4, 2022
72
Maurits90/Wikimedia Commons

San Francisco Commuter Train Derailed by Scorching Track Temperatures, Extreme Heat

July 4, 2022
45
Fadi Hage/wikimedia commons

Indoor Farming Revolution Comes with Significant Carbon Cost

July 4, 2022
33

Recent Posts

EdmondMeinfelder/flickr

Dire Living Conditions, Climate-Driven Heat Wave Produce Deadliest Human Smuggling Event in U.S. History

July 4, 2022
32
Adrian Grycuk/Wikimedia Commons

Youth Climate Case Moves to Top Tribunal in European Court

July 4, 2022
30
Seci/wikimedia commons

Saudi Aramco Talks Net-Zero, Plans to Boost Production Through 2035

July 4, 2022
18
Keith Weller/Wikimedia Commons

U.S. Methane Plan Gives Big Ag a Free Pass

July 4, 2022
24
Mont SUTTON snow terrain

Southern Quebec Towns Scramble for Solutions as Water Sources Dwindle

July 4, 2022
33
Pxhere

Marine Stewardship Figures Prominently in Latest Project Drawdown List

July 4, 2022
22
Next Post
Pexels

International Energy Agency Projections Take Climate Change ‘Over the Cliff’

The Energy Mix

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Navigate Site

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Follow Us

No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}